theDIBB

theDIBB (https://www.thedibb.co.uk/forums/index.php)
-   Current Virus Issue Forum (https://www.thedibb.co.uk/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=242)
-   -   Is this good news? (https://www.thedibb.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=1166345)

tspill 29 Mar 20 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fiffio (Post 14369520)
At the same time the uk is only testing those admitted to hospital and many are dying in their homes. They are also putting a number of deaths down to pneumonia instead of CV. If a person has underlying health conditions that were being managed and they does due to a combination with those and cv then I would class this as dying due to cc.

In Italy the 12% includes pneumonia. It includes deaths related to CV.

Minnie18 29 Mar 20 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tspill (Post 14369528)
In Italy the 12% includes pneumonia. It includes deaths related to CV.

Flu causes pneumonia/heart attacks plus much more.

tspill 29 Mar 20 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minnie18 (Post 14369531)
Flu causes pneumonia/heart attacks plus much more.

I know. The 12% numbers include those they believe are related to CV. The 88% are where CV they believe didn't play a part.
At least that is my understanding.
If this does turn out to be the case it means the death numbers due to CV are an order lower than is being quoted in Italy.
Not sure about UK numbers though and how exactly these are measured.
I really dont believe this is as bad as all the doom mongers say; nor as good as those that try to minimise it. It will be somewhere in the middle.

Bottom line is that we aren't all at the same level of risk. Those on the front line are most at risk. Hats off and respect to them. I know several nurses and doctors and some are scared stiff going to work these days.
The rest of us - IF we follow the guidelines - are very low risk.
A lot of people stirring up unnecessary panic. It is hard to know what is right.

sunseeker100 30 Mar 20 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neilhd (Post 14368705)
I agree. A daily statistic of deaths is pretty meaningless. What I'd wish they would announce is:

Daily deaths WITH Covid-19 (this is what they do now).
Daily deaths where Covid-19 is actually the main cause of death.
Daily deaths of other respiratory diseases/illnesses.
Daily number of excess deaths over what they would normally expect to see this time of year.

Last weekend I decided I needed to find some of these stats as I donít like the constant news reporting of each death without any other information. I like data (sad I know!) so knew there would be plenty of info out there.

Took me a while and some data I wanted wasnít easily found, but on the Office of National Statistics website I found the following...

weekly deaths U.K. 2020 - 14,000 in early Jan then down to average of 10,500 now which looking at previous years is no different
Weekly deaths from respiratory illness (not recorded as flu or a virus but probably pneumonia or similar) - 2000+ in early Jan then down to average 1,400 now.

Iím guessing the higher numbers were seasonal as each winter sees higher numbers.

At the moment they are only releasing numbers of those who died having a positive test for Covid-19, Iím assuming only an autopsy would try and determine if the virus contributed to a death and even then, might not be able to say with any certainty.

We arenít likely to know for maybe a year at least what the actual figures mean when calculated across the world, maybe the overall death rate for this year will end up being low, or much higher than other years. All weíre getting now is each death announced and if that happened all the way through winter any year weíd be horrified and afraid. Iím not dismissing the virus, just explaining why I think we should look deeper than just what the media push out. This info and lots more is available so why arenít journalists publishing it?

I tend to go on about causation and correlation a lot as reporting data irresponsibly really winds me up! An interesting website which explains this really well is linked below - itís tongue in cheek, but all accurate just reported in a certain way.

https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

winterphoenix 30 Mar 20 07:06 AM

I consistently see photographs of victims with Ďno underlying health conditionsí and an a huge number are at best very overweight, at worst borderline morbidly obese. Iím not being rude and Iím not trying to weight-shame anyone but being that overweight IS a health condition and puts massive pressure on the internal organs. Diabetes risk. Cholesterol. So many associated dangers that we are warned about daily by health experts. So, Ď65 and no underlying issuesí becomes Ďpushing the age category for at-risk and already in poor physical condition.í The pressure on the lungs alone would be catastrophic. It is also worth noting that it is no known conditions. Many are found to have an unknown issue when looked at post-mortem and it was said the other day that all but 4 victims had a condition that was known. There are always going to be a small few in good health who die anyway but that happens with any illness.

I think the fact remains, though. People are being chalked down as a Covid death even in this country if they happened to test positive. There is nothing to definitively say Covid is what killed them and that makes the figures skewed to me. They also give us no basis for comparison. How many died from normal flu? How many would have died anyway? People are running around like headless chickens in a state of constant doom because we are not getting a full picture.

JSP 30 Mar 20 08:41 AM

Deleted post :)

tspill 30 Mar 20 10:19 AM

And unfortunately this is the problem. The numbers make the headlines - yet they are meaningless without full understanding of what exactly they mean. And that information seems difficult to get. Possibly as it is not known - and maybe will never be known as I am assuming autopsies wont be carried out on most. So we may never actually know the truth so even in a year, the information will be inaccurate.
My worry is that the numbers could be not just slightly erroneous, but an order of magnitude out which is hugely misleading. At least the Italians have published their position on this (or at least what they believe). Not sure the UK has.

winterphoenix 30 Mar 20 10:38 AM

Pretty sure I read somewhere that the UK are not distinguishing either, i.e CV is listed as cause of death only because the patient had it. It may well have been a contributing factor but that does not mean these people died of CV and it has been conceded that two thirds would have died regardless. And thatís a conservative estimate. There is no transparency and thatís what is frustrating. These numbers mean nothing without context and without definitive data. There is high chance a majority of us have already had it. The death rate is less than 1%.

NewtoOrlando 30 Mar 20 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunseeker100 (Post 14369770)
Last weekend I decided I needed to find some of these stats as I donít like the constant news reporting of each death without any other information. I like data (sad I know!) so knew there would be plenty of info out there.

Took me a while and some data I wanted wasnít easily found, but on the Office of National Statistics website I found the following...

weekly deaths U.K. 2020 - 14,000 in early Jan then down to average of 10,500 now which looking at previous years is no different
Weekly deaths from respiratory illness (not recorded as flu or a virus but probably pneumonia or similar) - 2000+ in early Jan then down to average 1,400 now.

Iím guessing the higher numbers were seasonal as each winter sees higher numbers.

At the moment they are only releasing numbers of those who died having a positive test for Covid-19, Iím assuming only an autopsy would try and determine if the virus contributed to a death and even then, might not be able to say with any certainty.

We arenít likely to know for maybe a year at least what the actual figures mean when calculated across the world, maybe the overall death rate for this year will end up being low, or much higher than other years. All weíre getting now is each death announced and if that happened all the way through winter any year weíd be horrified and afraid. Iím not dismissing the virus, just explaining why I think we should look deeper than just what the media push out. This info and lots more is available so why arenít journalists publishing it?

I tend to go on about causation and correlation a lot as reporting data irresponsibly really winds me up! An interesting website which explains this really well is linked below - itís tongue in cheek, but all accurate just reported in a certain way.

https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

Thank you for this! I'm a lover of statistics working for the NHS and and this is just what I've been looking for!

sully301 30 Mar 20 07:07 PM

it will be interesting to see how much has been saved by the NHS by people not going to hospital unnecessarily and also accident death rates as there are less people on the roads etc.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:28 AM.

Powered by vBulletin - Copyright © 2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.