This is 2020 conspiracy rubbish. Thankfully there's really not so much of it about any more, which is why this thread stands out.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
This is 2020 conspiracy rubbish. Thankfully there's really not so much of it about any more, which is why this thread stands out.
Exactly, right from the start, there were a rump of people who refused to believe that Covid was the killer it has turned out to be (reading the early pages of the main Covid thread on here is very revealing in the cases of some contributors). In the last week, the UK has seen the highest number of Covid deaths in almost a year and still we get this pointless “with” or “from” Covid stuff - what does it matter? Over 150,000 people in this country have died in less than two years after catching Covid and, in every case, the virus was deemed to have played a part in the death - the UK’s figures are among the worst in Europe, I dread to think what they would have been like if we’d treated Covid as lightly as some on here said we should.Originally Posted by lardy
I agree with what you say except the part i highlighted.
covid is mentioned on the death certificate if it is present because it is a reportable disease/condition and the doctor is obliged to record it. I think the point people are trying to make is that some of these people would have died anyway.
Agreed some would have died later but their underlying conditions would have got them in the end. The only way we will know this is if the figures begin to show less deaths than historically in the next year or so. we cannot tell that now.
The other point is the number of people taking into hospital to be treated for covid and those that are/were admitted for some other cause and were then 'incidentally' found to give a positive test result for covid. If they die it is still recorded as a covid death, which would seem unreasonable. The number of 'incidental' covid sufferers in hospitals at the moment is very relevant when looking at the threat from the new virus. most of those people didn't even know they had it and showed no symptoms.
It leads some people to think that the NHS or whoever is collating this information is deliberately attempting to make it as scary as possible to inflate the need for restrictions. (Oh sorry Mr Drakeford.... protections)
Most people that die in this country have underlying health issues, usually some form of organ failure. Then they catch a virus of some sort and their body isn't strong enough for them to recover. If a brick landed on your head from a great height and you died then the cause of death would be multiple head Injuries. The brick wouldn't get a mention on the death certificate. I'm confusing myself now.
This is gibberish.
How is it gibberish when the average age of death with Covid is seven weeks lower compared to the average deaths (82.5) in normal circumstances?
Around three-quarters of deaths involving COVID-19 linked to a record of a positive test result (79.2% in England, Public Health England data, 70.4% in Wales, Public Health Wales data).
Why is it> The point is that many of the people who's underlying conditions made them susceptible to Covid may well have dies within 2 years anyway. So we need to see what the death rate is in the next 2 years to see if it is lower, than average thereby balancing out the figures. If after this time it is still higher I'd reckon that would give you a clearer view of the death rate purely due to covid.
Many people in their 80s will die within the next few years - does that mean you shouldn't help them now?
Should we not treat cancers in people over 85?
I agree with you entirely. i'm not in any way suggesting it is acceptable or good, but it may be a fact! that's all.
Sometimes they can’t as the chemo is too much…..
If I understand you correctly, I don't understand you.
Everyone dies - most of us are agreed on that. Everyone dies just once - also generally agreed (not sure about Truthpaste!)
When a pandemic hits the excess death figures must be balanced at a later date by lower than normal death figures (allowing for the graph to adjust for changes to life expectancy etc). The impact of the pandemic when it comes to deaths is premature deaths.
I have no problem with the Covid death figures - where the measure is people who have died solely due to Covid (even then the actual cause of death will not be the virus) and those for whom underlying health factors were triggered by the virus bringing on severe illness and death that wouldn't have happened at that time.
Where excess deaths gets a bit difficult is where the 'collatoral damage' in a stressed health service leads to more deaths of people where the cause had nothing to do with Covid. Even then it is not a simple case of saying that Covid prevention measures and/or swamped hospitals caused those non-Covid deaths - in those cases where the Covid prevention measures didn't actually protect those vulnerable people.
As other posters have said the government could take other action to mitigate the impact - more/less restrictions, clearer advice and information, added screening capacity, having a pandemic emergency plan that was up to date and properly resourced, different budget choices.
I don't think there is any readily available data set for the UK that can separate those strands out. In the absence of that we get more circular arguments that go nowhere.
Again, I agree with you. One cannot disregard a person's death or say "He would have died anyway" for as you rightly point out we all die anyway.
Your comment about 'premature' deaths is the point.
If we now have a higher than historical death rate now since Mar 20 but over the same period going forward we have a lower than historical rate then that should give us more of a realistic idea of the excess deaths overall. It will suggest that certain vulnerable people who died may have died anyway in the following period, just that their death was sooner than expected. That is not a good thing of course but if you can imagine the death rate being affected by the virus like a wave, after a peak comes a trough and there is a mean line across both. Any residual excess deaths across the peak and trough will give a clearer picture.
This seems about right. The time dimension is critical here. Excess deaths are time specific. And excess deaths this period means a reduced number of expected deaths next period.
There are three scenarios to compare excess deaths for the pandemic:
1. Actuality - pandemic, mitigation
2. Counter factual 1 - no pandemic
3. Counter factual 2 - pandemic, no mitigation
My guess is we'll eventually find excess deaths in the three scenarios will run 3 > 1 > 2.
How is having a viewpoint on official ONS data a conspiracy. People are entitled to debate and question it without being closed down.
Every death from anything is tragic but the media should also give a balanced view to reassure the public. I hope there is a proper enquiry into this.
How is having a viewpoint on official NASA figures of men on the moon a conspiracy?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote