ONS Figures For Weekly Deaths Released Up to Week 15

Can't recall his name but the Head of Health Statistics (or whatever his title is) at the ONS is very impressive.

suggests the number of deaths from COVID-19 is nearer 25k if you roll that forward 10 days

Not just BS , but BS in graph form . Very impressive

Apr 21, 2020 -- 12:14PM, Reynard wrote:

Not just BS , but BS in graph form . Very impressive

So these are not the number of deaths registered in England and Wales ?
Do you perhaps have an alterative set that you would like to share with us?

the missing care home deaths show up for a second week

CLYDEBANK29
21 Apr 20 10:57
Joined: 10 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 9,724 | Blogger: CLYDEBANK29's blog
suggests the number of deaths from COVID-19 is nearer 25k if you roll that forward 10 days

^

Possibly or that the lockdown is causing deaths due to the stress and lack of medical care for other things.

Imagine being in a care home or a hospice without being able to see your relatives. Imagine having a suspected heart attack and not daring to go to hospital because of covid-19 fears. Imagine  having stomach pains and being told it is Covid sympthoms when infact it is stomach cancer and not treating it early enough.

The list is endless. With A&E down 40%-50%, no one seeing a doctor, stress levels going through the roof, excess drinking on the up and loneliness these numbers of deaths will increase in the months ahead. 

It is not a simple as taking deaths and subracting previous years. It is not as simple as saying it is Covid19 with no test (75% tests have been negative).


Even in hospital the officials say died having tested positive for the virus regardless of cause of death. Not died due the virus. Yet the Sky Headline says 'Coronavirus deaths 41% highers that official figures'. Not it isn't.
Get ready for the figures being pumped up for political reasons.

Maybe they are "pumped down" for political reasons at the present time IT?

If the weekly figures had been significantly lower than the five year average, what would be your line then ?

I can't see anyone on this thread making any statements that are denying that there will likely be an impact on health outcomes as a result of the lockdown.

It is likely that some of this impact will result in negative outcomes, whilst some of if this impact will result in positive outcomes (reduced industrial and car related deaths for example).

At this point in time, there is simply insufficient data to support a thorough and detailed analysis.
But such an analysis will come in the fullness of time.

Meanwhile, all we have is the raw data.

Directed to IT ......

if they did more testing they would prove they were corona virus and the trolls wouldnt have to look silly

Goose back with his pointless graph again

Week 15 uh

25,000 probably underestimated ons only just releasing updated figures..

I do love the medias sudden move to overall deaths at all time highs though, like its no longer scaring people this thing so lets move the goal posts a little

And even the overall deaths are nothing to be bothered about its like they are running out of material at this point

Wonder what the first graph out in the briefing today ?

1.01 transport use .

So we've experienced these overall death numbers at this time of year multiple times before

You couldn't make it up at this point, its quite funny to listen to them trying to really sell it as something gigantic and even they are failing to do it

Oh dear

Can't come out with an actual argument again just resorts to mocking

Apr 21, 2020 -- 2:34PM, SontaranStratagem wrote:

Oh dear Can't come out with an actual argument again just resorts to mocking

Well SS, you were the one that was mocking everyone that said the virus existed. So you went to the hospital in Mansfield and pestered valuable NHS staff, badgering them about the virus, then you caught it yourself. Have you no shame?

And then comes on here on a daily basis and mocks officially released data.

It is interesting that the ONS went out of their way to explain in detail why their numbers are different from the Governments. The key point in their latest weeks total registered deaths number is that it is the highest for any week in the last 20 years.

total population is as well

Angoose
21 Apr 20 11:49
Joined: 18 Jul 02
| Topic/replies: 15,040 | Blogger: Angoose's blog
If the weekly figures had been significantly lower than the five year average, what would be your line then ?

^

If they were lower than I think it would be extraordinary given how many deaths they reckon Covid19 has caused.

My concern is:

1. Hospital deaths after being tested positive for the virus mean nothing as people die of other things.
2. Community deaths with untested people that show symptoms mean nothing as 75% at least will not have it.
3. Covid19 threat is potentially going to be used as an excuse to keep everyone locked up when keeping everyone locked up could be causing more extra deaths that covid itself.

They could literally attribute any death to Covid. The press are complicit in turning 'deaths after testing positive for the virus' to 'deaths from Covid19'.

It is disgraceful.

Well done IT..I'm firmly in your camp.

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2020/04/14/coronavirus-is-lockdown-leading-to-deaths-from-other-causes/

Of the 16,387 deaths registered in England and Wales during the week ending 3 April, around a fifth (3,475) mentioned “novel coronavirus”.

But the ONS said there were 6,082 more deaths during that week compared to the five-year average, which raises questions about the reasons behind the remaining two and a half thousand additional deaths.

Professor Maureen Baker, former Chair of the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP), said there could be a number of explanations.

“Data from previous pandemics of the 20th century have shown that health pandemics tend to lead to a rise in all-cause mortality,” she added.

“There could be greater difficulty for people with non-Covid symptoms to currently get access to hospital services, or not wanting to access them due to the Covid risk.

“It might be the case that people with emergency symptoms – for instance, chest pain, abdominal pain, severe headache – are not consulting a doctor as early as they normally would with such symptoms.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-indefinite-lockdown-causing-death-of-hope-vg5z9wmn7

A public health expert has called on the Scottish government to give the public a clearer understanding of the lockdown exit strategy as fears grow that deaths are rising among people who do not have coronavirus.

Linda Bauld, a behavioural scientist at Edinburgh University, said that people with potentially fatal illnesses were avoiding their GPs after advice that the health service was becoming overwhelmed. Others have been drinking themselves to death sitting at home, she said.

yeah cos there are widespread reports of folk drinking themselves to death

whereas there are reports from every carehome up and down the country of folk
passing away with corona virus symptoms

but the trolls continue to troll

So no valid points in the Times article?

No valid points suggesting the fact we have basically shut our NHS to everyone apart 'Covid' patients could be causing problems?

The NHS is shut to nobody. If people are too scared to go to hospital for relatively routine treatment and die an avoidable death, that is a direct consequence of there being a pandemic. That's what happens in a pandemic, deaths from all causes rise. If there were no lockdown, it would be no different only this would happen even more and more people would die of covid too.

The time to complain about a lockdown is long gone. They let it spread out of hand and had no choice but to lockdown until that spread has been dealt with, has waned and then they will be back in the position that they were in when they let it spread in the first place, except this time they will (assumedly) take it seriously and make sure it doesn't get out of hand again, requiring another lockdown. Still some way from that, you have to peak and then it will probably take the same amount of time it took to peak for it to wane enough to return to anything like it was before it got over here.

You are basically complaining about there being a pandemic like some of the protesting Americans are.

You should be complaining about why they didn't take it seriously, like S Korea or Japan, neither of whom have had a lockdown. Sweden is not a comparable case to the UK or any mainland European country. Sweden let it spread too like all of europe, it's just that it couldn't spread like it did everywhere else because the country isn't set up for it to spread over there like it is everywhere else.

Not taking it seriously from day 1 = inevitable lockdown.

To minimise direct deaths from the virus I agree lurka.

But minimise overall deaths due to the pandemic's social, economic and their associated health problems only time will tell.

Locking down everyone is a cheap win for governments - especially if the public are calling for it.The consquencial deaths will be over months, years and decades to come.

tories are fcuked, face facts.

Maybe time will prove you to be right. But people getting ill from things like drinking too much on a lockdown or not exercising/eating well is their own fault.

But every government was faced with scientific evidence/advice of a guaranteed huge short-term spike in deaths after sitting on their hands and letting it spread. They had no choice at that point, that's why they all did the same thing.

The lockdown was nothing to do with people calling for it, it was due to the scientific models all predicting the NHS failing and having to turn away sick patients to die at home, of course those with other illness would have been turned away too in such a situation. The death toll was being predicted without strict lockdown measures in hundred thousands not tens of thousands.

Of course it's easy to say that's bullsh1t and pretend you know better without any logical reasoning but you have to base decisions on more than that.

Insider Trader you are rightly protecting your vulnerable wife but to expect others to keep the economy going and risk catching this themselves is simply looking for jam on it.

An unquantifiable number of deaths over a much longer period from an economic downturn which will happen everywhere is a lot more palatable to any government and lot more easily explained/excused than a guaranteed huge short-term spike in deaths. That's politics, even if the overall damage ends up being worse.

lapsy pa
21 Apr 20 16:01
Joined: 29 Jan 09
| Topic/replies: 3,528 | Blogger: lapsy pa's blog
Insider Trader you are rightly protecting your vulnerable wife but to expect others to keep the economy going and risk catching this themselves is simply looking for jam on it.

^

'others' already are risking their lives.

I think there will come a tipping point when people will have had enough of being locked down and losing their jobs, businesses, health, wealth etc etc. Not there yet but could be in a few months.

I think that probably has started IT but that's pandemics for you.You won't worry about anything like health wealth etc if you are dead.

Air/traffic pollution falling drastically is a big plus for life expectancy at least.

look at all the lives being saved from pollution, will far outweigh the future loss of lives.................

lovely blue skies, fish a jumpin, bees a dancin

a load of americans whos lifestyle is buying in guns and supplies ready for lockdown and are now out protesting about being locked down.

rednecks , lit up by idiot youtube channels

some of their followers on here posting nonsense day after day.

the good lord told me to shoot the virus and go to the mardi gras

Just some comments from people who work in London hospitals to back up my points....

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/3886452-The-hospital-I-work-in-is-so-quiet?pg=1

London hospital.
Half empty. Some wards have less than a handful of patients, some wards are closed. Most staff have been moved to wards so are falling over selves. While their regular work goes undone.
A&E very quiet. I’ve sent patients there who are seen immediately. The heart attacks, strokes and appendicitis cases are presenting too late. People with covid are waiting too long to present. If you get breathless then for goodness sake come in. I’m so cross at the initial advice to stay home until struggling.
Had a look through covid ward lists and vast majority patients are aged over 70. Hardly any patients under 60, those who are have underlying health problems for the most part. Lots more men than women affected.
It’s just a snapshot but echoed by colleagues in other hospitals.
I think we can / should start to move back to normal life soon for the well young people among us. I fear for the short and longer term economic hit. It’s crazy to have all these young well people furloughed or made redundant.

My best friend, who is a consultant in a large hospital in the south (not London) related the exact same thing to me yesterday. She said they're finishing their ward rounds by 11am, and are twiddling their thumbs much of the time, feeling very guilty about being clapped for, every Thursday.
BUT, she is very worried about what's heading their way once some of this is lifted, and their clinic waiting lists will explode and there will be many patients who will be too late for effective treatment.

^

Have a read about things the main stream media avoid.

Looks like we have another government scandal brewing then, doesn't it.

But not enough nurses at the Nightingdale?

Apr 22, 2020 -- 9:37AM, InsiderTrader wrote:

Just some comments from people who work in London hospitals to back up my points....https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/3886452-The-hospital-I-wo... hospital.Half empty. Some wards have less than a handful of patients, some wards are closed. Most staff have been moved to wards so are falling over selves. While their regular work goes undone.A&E very quiet. I’ve sent patients there who are seen immediately. The heart attacks, strokes and appendicitis cases are presenting too late. People with covid are waiting too long to present. If you get breathless then for goodness sake come in. I’m so cross at the initial advice to stay home until struggling.Had a look through covid ward lists and vast majority patients are aged over 70. Hardly any patients under 60, those who are have underlying health problems for the most part. Lots more men than women affected.It’s just a snapshot but echoed by colleagues in other hospitals.I think we can / should start to move back to normal life soon for the well young people among us. I fear for the short and longer term economic hit. It’s crazy to have all these young well people furloughed or made redundant.My best friend, who is a consultant in a large hospital in the south (not London) related the exact same thing to me yesterday. She said they're finishing their ward rounds by 11am, and are twiddling their thumbs much of the time, feeling very guilty about being clapped for, every Thursday.BUT, she is very worried about what's heading their way once some of this is lifted, and their clinic waiting lists will explode and there will be many patients who will be too late for effective treatment.^Have a read about things the main stream media avoid.

yeah, the MSM tend to cover up for the administrational errors of the government.

administrative

Millions not getting swear tests because of the lockdown. Other cancers tests as well.

That's what you get for not listening to others and putting a chancer and gollum at the helm.

Theresay May wouldn't have handled it all a lot better if she hadn't been stabbed in the back.

*would have

As would Rory Stewart or any of the other Tory leadership candidates.

Then the PPE myth is exploded here....

Theredjellybean Mon 20-Apr-20 21:50:27

The issue is if the government and media reported the fact that most hospitals were coping well, had capacity, and staff etc then there would start to be civil unrest over lock down.. In the first three weeks the nhs were in many places still prepping so any lack of adherence to lock down on a big scale would have been catostrophic.
Now there is cautious commentary about nhs coping.. Giving the impression this is because the infe rates plateaued due to lock down.

I'd also like to debunk the reporting over ppe.. I work spilt roles a cross south west primary care and several London trusts.. None are short of ppe.
There have been no actual footage of empty stores or hcp on wards with no kit on.
So where are these hospitals with no ppe?

Apr 22, 2020 -- 10:05AM, InsiderTrader wrote:

Millions not getting swear tests because of the lockdown. Other cancers tests as well.

I don't need a fcking swear test. I know I can swear.

Angoose
22 Apr 20 08:50
Joined: 18 Jul 02
| Topic/replies: 15,048 | Blogger: Angoose's blog
Looks like we have another government scandal brewing then, doesn't it.

^

Same in other countries. Heard similar stories from USA, Germany and first hand reports of empty A&E department in Spain.

* smear test.

FT are bandying an actual death rate of 41,000,many occuring outside hospitals, won't it be more responsible to deploy nhs staff twiddling their thumbs as you say to where the cases are?
Is that a failure on the goverments part?

And where is the government media campaign to encourage the public to continue going to hospital for non COVID health issues ?

Angoose
22 Apr 20 09:25
Joined: 18 Jul 02
| Topic/replies: 15,051 | Blogger: Angoose's blog
And where is the government media campaign to encourage the public to continue going to hospital for non COVID health issues ?

^

They have said to present if you have chest pains etc. but this is not enough.

I agree though in general 'stay home' 'protect nhs' 'save lives' thing is a mixed message. It has been fanned on social media and by the press making people too scared to present.

All the death numbers with the press converting 'died after testing to positive' to 'died of..' is scaring people from presenting.

Also it appears 111 are not allowing people in until they are far gone with Covid symptoms and red zone beds sit empty. Green zone beds are empty because of the fear factor as well.

Same in Spain. Daughter went to local A&E. Totally empty. Staff standing around chatting.

So what do you think the agenda is behind what is happening ?

And all the general stuff like follow ups after operations cancelled.

I believe the idea is to eventually put all covid patients in the Nightingale hospitals and open the others back for normal services.

One thing is for sure there will be a massive job for the NHS to catch up after this.

Aren't A&E's supposed to be mostly empty? They just haven't been be because people went there with every ever so little niggle or because they wanted fasttracked treatment?

A&E does exactly what it does on the tin, they deal with accidents and emergencies.
With reduced social activity, you would expect to see a dramatic reduction in the demand for A&E services.
And that is exactly one of the desired outcomes of a lockdown, A&E resources being released to be directed elsewhere.

Already sounds like there are going to be several thousand extra deaths from cancer because people aren't going to the doctors

Why is Sweden consider somehow different from other Countries?  If the virus spreads easiest in urban communities then Sweden should be suffering worst than other European countries, the uk for example, it's a myth that the Swedish people live in log cabins miles from each other.



A total of 8,016,000 – 85 per cent – of the Swedish population lived in an urban area; occupying only 1,3 per cent of Sweden's total land area, and the most populous urban area is Stockholm at 1,4 million people.
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Ur...
Urban areas in Sweden - Wikipedia

In the Uk only 61% of people live in urban areas


I

"I'd also like to debunk the reporting over ppe.. I work spilt roles a cross south west primary care and several London trusts.. None are short of ppe.
There have been no actual footage of empty stores or hcp on wards with no kit on.
So where are these hospitals with no ppe?"

Not sure the source of that quote on this thread but

UK deaths per million 255
NHS staff 1.5 million
NHS staff deaths 100
NHS staff deaths per million 67

So NHS staff are 3.8 times LESS likely to die from COVID-19 than the general population.  Obviously there are some issues, but it doesn't really point to PPE being the huge problem that it's built up to be.  But then of course you can't question that narrative in the mainstream media as you risk being labelled a heartless traitor

PPE is a press talking point.

Notice how none of the questions are about last of normal treatments for cancers etc.

England is 83.4% not 61%.
Germany is 78%
Belgium is 98%

Angoose
22 Apr 20 09:38
Joined: 18 Jul 02
| Topic/replies: 15,052 | Blogger: Angoose's blog
A&E does exactly what it does on the tin, they deal with accidents and emergencies.
With reduced social activity, you would expect to see a dramatic reduction in the demand for A&E services.
And that is exactly one of the desired outcomes of a lockdown, A&E resources being released to be directed elsewhere.

^

Angoose I suggest you take some time to actually read the thread I posted from real people working in the real world NHS.

It give a better picture than you speculating from looking at your charts and databases.

People are not presenting for things like heart pains!

So more urbanised than most other countries,

Apr 22, 2020 -- 10:52AM, CLYDEBANK29 wrote:

"I'd also like to debunk the reporting over ppe.. I work spilt roles a cross south west primary care and several London trusts.. None are short of ppe.There have been no actual footage of empty stores or hcp on wards with no kit on.So where are these hospitals with no ppe?"Not sure the source of that quote on this thread butUK deaths per million 255NHS staff 1.5 millionNHS staff deaths 100NHS staff deaths per million 67 So NHS staff are 3.8 times LESS likely to die from COVID-19 than the general population.  Obviously there are some issues, but it doesn't really point to PPE being the huge problem that it's built up to be.  But then of course you can't question that narrative in the mainstream media as you risk being labelled a heartless traitor

To get a more worthwhile comparison, you'd need a similar breakdown for positive tests.
We've seen that age is a significant factor in whether you survive the virus, 87% of reported deaths as at 10 April being of individuals aged 65 or greater, 69% 75 or older.

I'd suggest that the age profile of NHS staff is not skewed towards those over 65.

Apr 22, 2020 -- 10:56AM, InsiderTrader wrote:

Angoose22 Apr 20 09:38Joined: 18 Jul 02| Topic/replies: 15,052 | Blogger: Angoose's blogA&E does exactly what it does on the tin, they deal with accidents and emergencies.With reduced social activity, you would expect to see a dramatic reduction in the demand for A&E services.And that is exactly one of the desired outcomes of a lockdown, A&E resources being released to be directed elsewhere.^Angoose I suggest you take some time to actually read the thread I posted from real people working in the real world NHS.It give a better picture than you speculating from looking at your charts and databases.People are not presenting for things like heart pains!

We are agreeing, but you continue to find a way to think otherwise.
The question that requires to be asked is why are individuals not presenting for non-COVID health complaints.

This will be known to the government, so where is the media campaign to encourage such individuals to visit their GP or a hospital ?

sure Angoose.  I'm assuming age is why it's 3.8 times lower.  Is the UK giving a full breakdown of hospital deaths by age?  Our figures not including elderly care homes.

There maybe a few deaths caused by a lack of PPE, which is tragic, but it'll be miniscule in the scheme of things, maybe not even double figures, and we should not forget that everyone is trying their best to get it.  The number of excess deaths from cancer already sounds like it's in the 1,000s.  It would just be good to get some perspective.

its pointless argueing over numbers,figures,graphs,statistics etc.they will go up when the gov want them up and down when they want them down. it will all be done to suit their agenda

Apr 22, 2020 -- 11:15AM, CLYDEBANK29 wrote:

sure Angoose.  I'm assuming age is why it's 3.8 times lower.  Is the UK giving a full breakdown of hospital deaths by age?  Our figures not including elderly care homes.There maybe a few deaths caused by a lack of PPE, which is tragic, but it'll be miniscule in the scheme of things, maybe not even double figures, and we should not forget that everyone is trying their best to get it.  The number of excess deaths from cancer already sounds like it's in the 1,000s.  It would just be good to get some perspective.

The ONS figures provide a breakdown by sex, place of death, and age groupings.
But not the cross section that you point to.

There will be a detailed inquiry at a future point, but we've already seen that we have a government that is unprepared to accept that it is possible that a better path could have been navigated through this incredibly complex situation.

You can predict the immediate response to the publication of such an inquiry, we've already got used to hearing it.
"We did the rights things at the right time."

nineteen points - you may well be right on the government figures but the ONS figures should be reliable given they are based on registrations of deaths irrespective of location - hospital care home home etc.

I posted on another thread  about a family friend, was receiving treatment for breast cancer and had it stopped when the virus hit, told to isolate for  12 weeks as her immune system severely  weakened, now receiving calls from her consultants urging her to attend, she's refusing.

Her attitude seems to be, if they tell me it's too dangerous for me to go to the supermarket why would I go to a hospital where I know the virus is, they cancelled my treatment because of that danger, what's changed.

We've had a few runs in of late potlis, but let's put that aside for a moment.

The case of your family friend is a worrying one.

Very understandable why there was an initial hold placed on her treatment.
But also very understandable now that, when called for treatment, she is reluctant to go and receive it.

This is a problem that requires to be dealt with on an urgent basis.

This is the issue Angoose.

You cannot tell me one minute it is so dangerous they should not go outside.

Then with more people currently having it than before the lockdown, no vaccine, no cure they cannot tell us it is safe to go out.

People will not want to part of that experiment.

It seems the Imperial Report (that was not peer reviewed and did not account for the ability to increase ICU bed numbers) plus people like Macron putting pressure on Boris meant he cracked from his initial policy with terrible consequences.

A strong leader would've said "Go eat your baguette, Froggie! Stuff your threats where they came from. We are the British"

Apr 22, 2020 -- 12:09PM, InsiderTrader wrote:

This is the issue Angoose.You cannot tell me one minute it is so dangerous they should not go outside.Then with more people currently having it than before the lockdown, no vaccine, no cure they cannot tell us it is safe to go out.People will not want to part of that experiment.It seems the Imperial Report (that was not peer reviewed and did not account for the ability to increase ICU bed numbers) plus people like Macron putting pressure on Boris meant he cracked from his initial policy with terrible consequences.

You cannot tell me one minute it is so dangerous they should not go outside.
Then with more people currently having it than before the lockdown, no vaccine, no cure they cannot tell us it is safe to go out.
People will not want to part of that experiment.

I'm not aware of any advice that has stated that "going outside" is dangerous.
I am aware of advice that has stated that we cannot continue to go outside in the manner that we have previously gone outside as that would be dangerous.

I suspect that you are already well aware of this.

And I suspect that you are well aware of the distinction.

Sure Angoose.

But you get the general point.

There are more cases now than before the lockdown started therefore if everyone was suddenly released we would get a bigger sudden spike than if we had let it spread with just social distancing.

The reality is it is not 'safe' until we have a vaccine or cure.

That there are more confirmed cases now than before the lockdown was imposed is the nature of the beast.
And I'm not arguing a case for everyone to be suddenly released.

There was an interesting interview on Sky News earlier with a health spokesman from New Zealand.
He described how the New Zealand response quickly changed once they realised that you would fail if you tried to apply a flu like response.

They quarantined ALL arrivals in to the country for a 14 day period.
To date, they have 1,451 recorded cases and 14 recorded deaths.

They have also tested 19,658 per million of population. The UK has tested 7,886 per million.

As pointed out on this and other threads, making country by country comparisons is dangerous.
There are many factors that required to be considered.

especially with a country like new zealand. it's a very sparsely populated country about 10 hours flight from anywhere else except Australia. it's the one time when their geographic isolation has been a benefit

in fact scott morrison is coming in for quite a bit of stick for continuing their strict Europe style lockdown. deaths still in single figures but 100s of 1000s of Australians out of a job

meant double figures for deaths in Australia. around 70 I think