UK Covid death toll

[baggy1]

Billy - do you understand the concept of excess deaths? It is basically how many more people that died at a point in, or period of, comparable time. It isn't how many more died in winter than summer. It also doesn't matter what people died of, it is just a direct comparison of total deaths. You can't have a 5 year average of excess deaths, you can have a 5YA for deaths. Your figures are doolally.

So for example in November and December 2017 (weeks 44-52) there were 94,766 deaths - the 5 year average at that point in time for those same weeks was 88,818
Added to that the total deaths for January and February (weeks 1-9) 2018 were 116,986 - the 5 year average was 105,777

So the total deaths for Nov to Feb 17/18 was 211,752 and the 5YA was 194,595, giving an excess death figure of 17,157. Where have you got 49k from? It's simply not true.

So the figure of 63,278 more deaths to date in 2020 is compared with the same period for 2019 (there have been 505,862 deaths in 2020 so far compared with 2019 deaths up to week 44 of 442,584 and the 5YA of 448,764) - that is what excess deaths are and no flu season in the last century has come close to touching that figure and we haven't even got to flu season.

And when you add the fact that the start of the year deaths were below the 5YA (4.8k less in 2020 than the 5YA at week 12) you will see how bad covid has been in terms of deaths this year. We won't be able to give a true figure until March 2021.

[baggiebuckster]

I mentioned this the other day but it was mainly ignored. If we are going to judge excess deaths then we are generally looking at a calendar year so 2017, 2018, 2019 etc. From that data it is of course possible to compare periods of time within those years so you can reasonably compare Mar-Apr for example against previous data.

The fact is that from March and April of 2020 with the increased death toll we shot ahead of the normal stats for excess deaths at that point in the year. Since then in order to 'get back on track' so to speak we would require less deaths than normal to offset the earlier surge. This hasn't happened and in all honesty can't be expected to happen either, certainly not enough to offset the large increase from spring time. However what has happened is that the monthly death figures (all causes) have not been anything out of the ordinary since then. So the question is 'Will we see another surge? or 'Will we see figures in line with other years?'.

We can't turn back time and rid ourselves of the 60k excess deaths but that is not the point. The point is have we now gained sufficient community immunity that we won't see the scale of deaths that were around in spring? Obviously SAGE think we will see the same impact so they have advised the Govt to lockdown. Other scientists don't think the impact will be anywhere near the same as they assume a much higher level of immunity in the community.

I doubt anyone argues that lockdown in March was not needed - but is lockdown needed now?

[billybassett]

I mentioned this the other day but it was mainly ignored. If we are going to judge excess deaths then we are generally looking at a calendar year so 2017, 2018, 2019 etc. From that data it is of course possible to compare periods of time within those years so you can reasonably compare Mar-Apr for example against previous data.

The fact is that from March and April of 2020 with the increased death toll we shot ahead of the normal stats for excess deaths at that point in the year. Since then in order to 'get back on track' so to speak we would require less deaths than normal to offset the earlier surge. This hasn't happened and in all honesty can't be expected to happen either, certainly not enough to offset the large increase from spring time. However what has happened is that the monthly death figures (all causes) have not been anything out of the ordinary since then. So the question is 'Will we see another surge? or 'Will we see figures in line with other years?'.

We can't turn back time and rid ourselves of the 60k excess deaths but that is not the point. The point is have we now gained sufficient community immunity that we won't see the scale of deaths that were around in spring? Obviously SAGE think we will see the same impact so they have advised the Govt to lockdown. Other scientists don't think the impact will be anywhere near the same as they assume a much higher level of immunity in the community.

I doubt anyone argues that lockdown in March was not needed - but is lockdown needed now?

Exactly. As I've stated the March lockdown was probably necessary to ensure we understood what the virus was and how to treat it. The length of it is very debatable.

The point I've been trying to make is that since July there's been no actual need to put the country back into any lockdown position. The net result, the full net result, will be to do more harm than good.

SAGE have constantly peddled RWCS. For this lockdown it was based on out of date data using the wrong assumptions (i.e. that 90% of us could still catch it). Fraud on a massive scale. Also they refuse to publish the false positive rate for the PCR. It's a total scandal and there's no other tests of this nature done anywhere in the world over the past 50 years by reputable scientists that have been peer reviewed and replicated that have never published an FPR.

But thankfully the Liverpool army test is going to blow that out of the water - but I'm sure the millions of pounds of PR machine being spent is coming up with a spin.

And yes baggy1 I do understand excess deaths. But as you keep avoiding there's no way in hell they were all death of covid or even had infections covid rna. I would factor an order of 50% weren't covid.

[baggy1]

My view is that we are starting to see excess deaths again but on a much smaller scale than earlier in the year (2.5k in the last 3 weeks data available to the end of October), however this appears to be mainly from hospitals in the north and hasn't spread back down to the south yet. If it spreads back down to London then we really are in the shit again IMO. This is why we have locked down (and let's be honest this lockdown is nowhere near what we had earlier in the year)

It could be said that it hasn't appeared in London yet because they had it so heavily earlier in the year and have built up an immunity, but that is a big risk that would potentially involve re-introducing it into an unban mass of 10m people.

[baggy1]

You clearly don't billy, excess deaths only report how many more have died in a particular year, where did you get the 49k from 2017/18 for example? - and you seem to think that 30k of those excess deaths are down to something other than covid, what could that possibly be?

[strawman]

And yes baggy1 I do understand excess deaths. But as you keep avoiding there's no way in hell they were all death of covid or even had infections covid rna. I would factor an order of 50% weren't covid.

You clearly don't billy, excess deaths only report how many more have died in a particular year, where did you get the 49k from 2017/18 for example? - and you seem to think that 30k of those excess deaths are down to something other than covid, what could that possibly be?

I believe he is quoting excess winter deaths i.e. excess deaths in the 4 months December to March. A period which we haven't yet been through for comparison

[baggy1]

Excess winter deaths against what comparison SM, to compare excess deaths you have to take the total in that period. I've quoted the 2017/18 winter deaths above and they are about 17k more than the average.

[strawman]

Excess winter deaths against what comparison SM, to compare excess deaths you have to take the total in that period. I've quoted the 2017/18 winter deaths above and they are about 17k more than the average.

That was my point - we haven't yet been through the winter period for 2020/21 so there is no valid comparison. BB is trying to compare winter excess deaths with the excess deaths in a totally different part of the year, but he will probably just state that the lockdown has extended the flu season so he can compare them

Edit - Ah may have missed your point - I have gone by this BBC article, not sure what they are comparing them with ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-463990...ics%20show.

[baggy1]

That article is simply wrong SM - I've given the figures for 2017/18 above, there was a 17k increase on the 5YA. 

If I extend it back to October and go as far as March the figures would be:
2017 Oct to Dec = 134,254 vs 5YA = 126,492
2018 Jan to Mar = 164,625 vs 5YA = 147,719

Totals 2017/18 = 298,879 vs 5YA = 274,211 means an excess of 24.6k

I don't know how they can get at 50k, it is literally 'fake' news (or deliberately skewed to get dramatic effect).

The only way I can make it get anywhere near working is by going back as far as August 2017 and taking it through to the end of April 2018

Aug - Dec 2017 217,237 vs 205,755 5YA = 11,482 excess
Jan - Apr 2018 219,402 vs 198,916 5YA = 20,486 excess

Total excess from August 17 - April 18 is 32k and that is as far as I can stretch it before it starts to reduce again. That's as near to 50k as you can get against the 5YA.

---

[quote="strawman" pid="240526" dateline="1605112276"]
[quote="baggy1" pid="240523" dateline="1605111593"]
That article is simply wrong SM - I've given the figures for 2017/18 above, there was a 17k increase on the 5YA. 

If I extend it back to October and go as far as March the figures would be:
2017 Oct to Dec = 134,254 vs 5YA = 126,492
2018 Jan to Mar = 164,625 vs 5YA = 147,719

Totals 2017/18 = 298,879 vs 5YA = 274,211 means an excess of 24.6k

I don't know how they can get at 50k, it is literally 'fake' news (or deliberately skewed to get dramatic effect).

[strawman]

That article is simply wrong SM - I've given the figures for 2017/18 above, there was a 17k increase on the 5YA. 

If I extend it back to October and go as far as March the figures would be:
2017 Oct to Dec = 134,254 vs 5YA = 126,492
2018 Jan to Mar = 164,625 vs 5YA = 147,719

Totals 2017/18 = 298,879 vs 5YA = 274,211 means an excess of 24.6k

I don't know how they can get at 50k, it is literally 'fake' news (or deliberately skewed to get dramatic effect).

---

The only way I can make it work is by going back as far as August 2017 and taking it through to the end of April 2018

Aug - Dec 2017 217,237 vs 205,755 5YA = 11,482 excess
Jan - Apr 2018 219,402 vs 198,916 5YA = 20,486 excess

Total excess from August 17 - April 18 is 32k and that is as far as I can stretch it before it starts to reduce again.

In the article its says that it is the highest since 1975/76  so I don't think the comparison they are talking about is a previous year or a 5 year average for similar periods, I'm not sure but I think the excess they are talking about is the comparison between the deaths during the Winder Months Dec to March and the other months of the year.