Coronavirus

[Barrykearley]

It’s clear yet you won’t find it.

facts are death rates are indeed higher than 5 year rolling average. But that could still be down to flu and other such things having a massive impact upon that.

the death rates that spike this data most is in the higher age categories - now without wishing to seem cold and I’m sure I’ll be accused of being callous   - those are groups whom are all actually expected to die.

I wonder if the ladies who die of cervical cancer in 3 years time and other such examples will be classified as “because” of covid policy?

[Barrykearley]

Boris looks to be trying to find a way of of his crisis of chaos and panic now by stopping free lateral flow tests.

Stop the testing and the daily numbers reported will indeed go down. Looks like that’s exactly what he wants to happen now.

[Bibs]

Just a reminder based on the last few days of posts, can we please keep this thread objective. Any personal snipes will be removed. Thanks.

[C8RKH]

Can I ask, because I cannot find the figures despite Google being my best friend, the number of deaths that have been recorded as being "by" Covid?  (i.e. COVID was the ACTUAL cause of death as opposed to be being a virus present in the system).  

I get the difference in the chart earlier but the issue for me is why are we referring to deaths where a positive COVID test was provided (but the cause of death was not COVID) and why are we comparing with metrics were COVID was mentioned on the death certificate.

For clarity, how does recording COVID impacts in this way (how we are doing it and presenting it as per the charts and info in this thread) differ from the accepted/normal practices that we have previously used to record, say, the impact of Influenza on deaths and hospitalisation. Are we treating the two things in the same way, consistently? If not, why not?

[Barrykearley]

@C8RKH you sadly won’t find that information unless I’m mistaken.

I’ve looked. The politicians will helpfully direct you to all the statistics and insist it’s all in the public domain.

Yet you simply won’t get an answer to this question.

[gregs24]

5 hours ago, Barrykearley said:

Utter tosh. What you have posted does not address that - it simply doesn’t. 
Doctors were instructed on how to fill out death certificates early on in the pandemic to avoid the need for autopsy. 
There is no metric published that shows cause of death “OF” covid.
The deaths over and above the usual number - yeah that’s a moot one - how does anyone know what this last couple of years flu impacts are? As that can swing wildly season to season.

Are you aware the medical profession are able to diagnose flu ? All this data is available.

Please read this again to understand how deaths are certified guidance-for-doctors-completing-medical-certificates-of-cause-of-death-covid-19.pdf (publishing.service.gov.uk)

It isn't 'utter tosh' it is how it is done.

5 hours ago, SFO said:

It's clear irrefutable evidence, it is rock solid, like all Government information and statistics 😂

UK Government doesn't do manipulation, oh no, it doesn't 😂

Please do elaborate and provide the links to these international standards.

You like to criticise, but never come up with any examples of this. Please provide evidence that the government are 'manipulating' the COVID data. Say exactly which data is being manipulated. The link I posted clearly refers to internationally agreed codes for causes of death and how these apply to the different parts of the death certificate.

[gregs24]

4 hours ago, Barrykearley said:

It’s clear yet you won’t find it.

facts are death rates are indeed higher than 5 year rolling average. But that could still be down to flu and other such things having a massive impact upon that.

the death rates that spike this data most is in the higher age categories - now without wishing to seem cold and I’m sure I’ll be accused of being callous   - those are groups whom are all actually expected to die.

I wonder if the ladies who die of cervical cancer in 3 years time and other such examples will be classified as “because” of covid policy?

Firstly excess deaths will include causes other than COVID and quite rightly should be blamed on COVID. It bungs up our health service and so people with cancer get diagnosed late or treated late leading to more deaths. Rather than arguing the toss of 'of' or 'with' COVID maybe you should consider the bigger picture.

The bold parts are outrageous and deeply offensive. Older people are all near to death so don't really count ?

[dave excell]

4 minutes ago, gregs24 said:

the death rates that spike this data most is in the higher age categories - now without wishing to seem cold and I’m sure I’ll be accused of being callous   - those are groups whom are all actually expected to die.

I suppose I am in this bracket. I do find the statement offensive even if not ment to be. Thanks.

[gregs24]

3 hours ago, C8RKH said:

Can I ask, because I cannot find the figures despite Google being my best friend, the number of deaths that have been recorded as being "by" Covid?  (i.e. COVID was the ACTUAL cause of death as opposed to be being a virus present in the system).  

I get the difference in the chart earlier but the issue for me is why are we referring to deaths where a positive COVID test was provided (but the cause of death was not COVID) and why are we comparing with metrics were COVID was mentioned on the death certificate.

For clarity, how does recording COVID impacts in this way (how we are doing it and presenting it as per the charts and info in this thread) differ from the accepted/normal practices that we have previously used to record, say, the impact of Influenza on deaths and hospitalisation. Are we treating the two things in the same way, consistently? If not, why not?

The reporting is no different to any disease or condition. You will see from the specimen death certificate how deaths are certified, with the 'Disease or condition leading directly to death' and then 'other disease or condition leading to 1a above'. There is then the option to add 'contributing factors'. This format is defined by WHO and is the data source for the reporting. There is 'died of' or 'died with' to report, just the definitions I copied above.

guidance-for-doctors-completing-medical-certificates-of-cause-of-death-covid-19.pdf (publishing.service.gov.uk)

2 hours ago, Barrykearley said:

@C8RKH you sadly won’t find that information unless I’m mistaken.

I’ve looked. The politicians will helpfully direct you to all the statistics and insist it’s all in the public domain.

Yet you simply won’t get an answer to this question.

WHO defines the underlying cause of death as “a) the disease or injury which initiated the train of morbid events leading directly to death, or b) the circumstances of the accident or violence which produced the fatal injury”

 

guidance-for-doctors-completing-medical-certificates-of-cause-of-death-covid-19.pdf (publishing.service.gov.uk)

[ChrisJ]

@C8RKH - You're in Aberdeenshire aren't you? This might interest you.

On 29/12/2021 at 19:11, ChrisJ said:

Talking of numbers - FOI request (not by me) made to Aberdeen Royal Infirmary earlier this year.

 

[Barrykearley]

1 hour ago, gregs24 said:

The bold parts are outrageous and deeply offensive. Older people are all near to death so don't really count ?

Was that my statement? NO.

Average ate of death in uk is 82/83. Hence statistically those over 80 are actually expected to die. No offence  intended for my statement of fact. 

[C8RKH]

Lol, what's outrageous and deeply offensive about saying older people are nearer to death?  That's the sort of response I would expect to see on front page of the Mirror or Express to be honest. 
Statistically, it's true ffs.
Certainly ever since I went well past 50 I have become more and more aware of the fragility of life as people of a similar age to me start to suffer from more and more illnesses and long term conditions, and yes, die! 
One thing we can all be sure of is that we will ALL, every single one of us, die. The lucky ones die old. Many not so lucky ones die much younger.  
One other thing that we can all be sure of is that statistically our death will be from something other than through COVID.
 

[Barrykearley]

2 hours ago, gregs24 said:

WHO defines the underlying cause of death as “a) the disease or injury which initiated the train of morbid events leading directly to death, or b) the circumstances of the accident or violence which produced the fatal injury”

And within that - anyone whom dies in a car crash within 28 days of testing positive for covid will indeed be included in the “died within 28 days”

along with many whom are admitted to hospital whom are in bad health and just happen to have covid at point of dying. Statistically people do actually die in uk hospitals I’m sad to say.

[C8RKH]

12 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

Statistically people do actually die in uk hospitals I’m sad to say.

I do believe that statistically more people die in hospital from something other than they originally were admitted to. Go figure!

[gregs24]

57 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

And within that - anyone whom dies in a car crash within 28 days of testing positive for covid will indeed be included in the “died within 28 days”

along with many whom are admitted to hospital whom are in bad health and just happen to have covid at point of dying. Statistically people do actually die in uk hospitals I’m sad to say.

And NOT in the category of people who died where COVID was mentioned on the death certificate - which is why there are different definitions. There is NO story here.

1 hour ago, C8RKH said:

Lol, what's outrageous and deeply offensive about saying older people are nearer to death?  That's the sort of response I would expect to see on front page of the Mirror or Express to be honest. 
Statistically, it's true ffs.
Certainly ever since I went well past 50 I have become more and more aware of the fragility of life as people of a similar age to me start to suffer from more and more illnesses and long term conditions, and yes, die! 
One thing we can all be sure of is that we will ALL, every single one of us, die. The lucky ones die old. Many not so lucky ones die much younger.  
One other thing that we can all be sure of is that statistically our death will be from something other than through COVID.
 

The suggestion that older people that die of COVID are in some way less significant that than younger people. Incidentally plenty of people in their 50's and 60's have died of COVID (never mind those with Long COVID).

Nothing LOL about that

2 hours ago, ChrisJ said:

@C8RKH - You're in Aberdeenshire aren't you? This might interest you.

 

If you scroll back you will see the answer to this. Why are you posting the same thing again ? It was all clearly explained.

Edited January 10, 2022 by gregs24

[gregs24]

35 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

I do believe that statistically more people die in hospital from something other than they originally were admitted to. Go figure!

No need to 'believe', evidence suggests the opposite - nothing to 'go figure'

[Relationship between the cause of admission and the cause of death in patients admitted to an internal medicine departament] - PubMed (nih.gov)

Older people who died in hospital: England 2017 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

The initial reason for admission impacts on the cause of death figures. Most people admitted with heart problems die of heart problems, whereas those admitted with dementia don't. You need to understand primary diagnosis, primary cause of death and underlying cause of death together with how death certificates are completed.

[Barrykearley]

Only need to mention covid anywhere on the death cert and it’s in the headline numbers on the bbc and Whittys graphs 

[C8RKH]

30 minutes ago, gregs24 said:

The suggestion that older people that die of COVID are in some way less significant that than younger people. Incidentally plenty of people in their 50's and 60's have died of COVID (never mind those with Long COVID).

Nothing LOL about that

OK, going to call you out on the above Greg. This is exactly what the previous poster stated:

"the death rates that spike this data most is in the higher age categories - now without wishing to seem cold and I’m sure I’ll be accused of being callous   - those are groups whom are all actually expected to die."

Please show me where exactly it is stated, or indeed actually explicitly implied, that people who are older are in "some way less significant than younger people"? It is YOU who have introdcued that suggestion in fact. You seem to invoke outrage and indignation an awful lot in your responses. Why is that? I suspect that you do not like to be, nor welcome, challenge to what YOU believe is right. Remember, it is not how you think you come across, but how people perceive it based on what you say/type, that matters!

 

 

 

[gregs24]

37 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

Only need to mention covid anywhere on the death cert and it’s in the headline numbers on the bbc and Whittys graphs 

Wow - you just don't get it. Clearly that is NOT the case as at least 2 of the three metrics do not require COVID on the death certificate to be included.

Why is this so hard to understand ?

[Barrykearley]

i understand fully.

Please read and reread what I have asked for. Time and time again 😫

there is no metric “died OF covid”

that’s not difficult to comprehend is it

[gregs24]

6 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

i understand fully.

Please read and reread what I have asked for.

there is no metric “died OF covid”

thays not difficult to comprehend is it

And I have explained why in detail - 'Death certificate mentions COVID' is the closest to what you want for all the reasons explained. Death certificates are legally prescribed - I have given you all of the information you need to understand this and how they are filled in. If you read and understand the link I gave you it will be abundantly clear why the above three definitions are used worldwide. 

Neither I nor anybody else can give you 'died of covid' because that probably means the death certificate has been completed incorrectly. People die of pneumonia, vascular collapse etc etc as a result of COVID. So the primary cause of death is say 'pneumonia' and the underlying cause of death is 'COVID' - as in COVID caused the pneumonia. This is why certificates where covid is the ONLY thing mentioned are probably actually incorrectly filled in and hence very rare.

I'm sorry if you still don't understand this and there is nothing more I can add to help you. I can assure you however that this is not a conspiracy or fearmongering

[Bibs]

This to and fro isn't really getting us very far. Please stop it chaps, agree you disagree or I'll lock the thread.

In other news, well people are being asked to go home. Who'd have thought it! 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-59940156

[gregs24]

47 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

OK, going to call you out on the above Greg. This is exactly what the previous poster stated:

"the death rates that spike this data most is in the higher age categories - now without wishing to seem cold and I’m sure I’ll be accused of being callous   - those are groups whom are all actually expected to die."

Please show me where exactly it is stated, or indeed actually explicitly implied, that people who are older are in "some way less significant than younger people"? It is YOU who have introdcued that suggestion in fact. You seem to invoke outrage and indignation an awful lot in your responses. Why is that? I suspect that you do not like to be, nor welcome, challenge to what YOU believe is right. Remember, it is not how you think you come across, but how people perceive it based on what you say/type, that matters!

 

 

 

'those are groups whom are all actually expected to die.' - BUT NOT NOW.

Distinguish between people who are more at risk (of which age is just one factor) and being old makes you more likely to die. If being old was the only reason then there would not be any increased deaths in old people, just the normal rates of death. Excess deaths above normal are currently 173K. COVID clearly kills more older people (this data is irrefutable) but many if not most would NOT have died if it were not for COVID at this time.

So actually most of those old people who died of COVID were NOT expected to die at this time.

The perception (which I am not alone in) was that if they were expected to die anyway then somehow this means the figures are less significant. To the many who have lost aged relatives before their time this would be seen as offensive.

[Barrykearley]

What fantastic news @Bibs.

Danny was home from school today early again as two of his teachers are off with covid. Strangely none of his classmates are - not Alice’s - and neither of them know of anyone at school off with covid. Just remember how much the modern generation use TikTok, snap face and other such apps - so they all know what everyone’s upto.

maybe just maybe - the spot of lemon juice tip is coming in handy within the public sector.

[gregs24]

4 minutes ago, Bibs said:

This to and fro isn't really getting us very far. Please stop it chaps, agree you disagree or I'll lock the thread.

In other news, well people are being asked to go home. Who'd have thought it! 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-59940156

Agreed

This has been a problem for some time - people waiting to be discharged with nowhere to go, such as those requiring care in a home or at home. Lack of care workers is a major problem.