In message , at 09:13:34 on Mon, 22 Jun
2020, remarked:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun
2020, Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun
2020, remarked:

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence
of the virus? Some consequences are well known, but it's becoming
clearer that it affects the blood as well as the lungs. Indeed, the
effect on the lungs may itself often be due to changes in the blood.

Meanwhile, if an affected person is run over by a bus, do they test the
corpse for virus? The UK at least has been severely rationing tests
until quite recently.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:13:34 on Mon, 22 Jun 2020,
remarked:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun
2020, Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun
2020, remarked:

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that
rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who
died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence
of the virus?

Well they don't, and that's "they" generally, both them and us

the point is the UK are more "honest" about this than some (not all) other
countries.

The UK puts primary cause = pneumonia, secondary cause = COVID on the forms,
thus it counts as a COVID death

some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID death
even if the patient has tested positive

That's all separate from the problem of people dying with COVID, completely
undiagnosed

and people dying of something else completely because they couldn't get the
necessary hospital treatment as all the beds are full

tim

tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:13:34 on Mon, 22 Jun 2020,
remarked:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun
2020, Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun
2020, remarked:

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that
rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who
died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only
measure the latter.

How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence
of the virus?

Well they don't, and that's "they" generally, both them and us

the point is the UK are more "honest" about this than some (not all) other
countries.

The UK puts primary cause = pneumonia, secondary cause = COVID on the forms,
thus it counts as a COVID death

some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID death
even if the patient has tested positive

That's all separate from the problem of people dying with COVID, completely
undiagnosed

and people dying of something else completely because they couldn't get the
necessary hospital treatment as all the beds are full

That's why it's best to use the excess deaths estimate when doing
comparisons. Of course, it may not be possible with countries that don't
keep the daily death statistics.

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:13:34 on Mon, 22 Jun
2020,
remarked:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun
2020, Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19
Jun
2020, remarked:

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that
the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without
the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public
would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that
rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who
died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries
only
measure the latter.

How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence
of the virus?

Well they don't, and that's "they" generally, both them and us

the point is the UK are more "honest" about this than some (not all)
other
countries.

The UK puts primary cause = pneumonia, secondary cause = COVID on the
forms,
thus it counts as a COVID death

some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID
death
even if the patient has tested positive

That's all separate from the problem of people dying with COVID,
completely
undiagnosed

and people dying of something else completely because they couldn't get
the
necessary hospital treatment as all the beds are full

That's why it's best to use the excess deaths estimate when doing
comparisons. Of course, it may not be possible with countries that don't
keep the daily death statistics.

doesn't need to be daily

quarterly figures (Jan-Mar, Apr-Jun etc) would be sufficient

tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:13:34 on Mon, 22 Jun
2020,
remarked:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun
2020, Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19
Jun
2020, remarked:

given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that
the
model needed a bit of tweaking.

Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'.

Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without
the
official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public
would
have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that
rate.

If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at
Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing,
because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive.

On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who
died
WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries
only
measure the latter.

How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence
of the virus?

Well they don't, and that's "they" generally, both them and us

the point is the UK are more "honest" about this than some (not all)
other
countries.

The UK puts primary cause = pneumonia, secondary cause = COVID on the
forms,
thus it counts as a COVID death

some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID
death
even if the patient has tested positive

That's all separate from the problem of people dying with COVID,
completely
undiagnosed

and people dying of something else completely because they couldn't get
the
necessary hospital treatment as all the beds are full

That's why it's best to use the excess deaths estimate when doing
comparisons. Of course, it may not be possible with countries that don't
keep the daily death statistics.

doesn't need to be daily

quarterly figures (Jan-Mar, Apr-Jun etc) would be sufficient

That would be too coarse, but monthly might be enough. The Economist has
some weekly analysis:
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/04/16/tracking-covid-19-excess-deaths-across-countries

In message , at 14:20:26 on Mon, 22 Jun
2020, tim... remarked:

some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID
death even if the patient has tested positive

Really?
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 14:20:26 on Mon, 22 Jun 2020,
tim... remarked:

some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID death
even if the patient has tested positive

Really

apparently

that's how some countries have absurdly low figures for deaths

On 23/06/2020 07:25, tim... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 14:20:26 on Mon, 22 Jun
2020, tim... remarked:

some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID
death even if the patient has tested positive

Really

apparently

that's how some countries have absurdly low figures for deaths




Cite?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.