Jump to content

Coronavirus - Part Two.

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, onewheeldave said:

Of course, goes without saying. However the same applies to flu, yet we have flu death stats without any of this bizarre 'Died within 28 days of contracting flu'.

The doctor signing the death certificate makes a call. As I said before that is available for covid and the death count from covid is twenty odd thousand higher counted that way.

Edited by Carbuncle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, onewheeldave said:

Of course, goes without saying. However the same applies to flu, yet we have flu death stats without any of this bizarre 'Died within 28 days of contracting flu'.

Because HMG brought the 28 day limit in to reduce the count of covid deaths.

 

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/public-health-england-death-data-revised/

10 hours ago, top4718 said:

Just imagine in a normal winter flu season if deaths within 28 days of having it had been added to the statistics, would we have had the same hysteria we have now.

How many people do you think die of flu in a normal winter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Carbuncle said:

The doctor signing the death certificate makes a call. As I said before that is available for covid and the death count from covid is twenty odd thousand higher counted that way.

 

4 minutes ago, Longcol said:

Because HMG brought the 28 day limit in to reduce the count of covid deaths.

 

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/public-health-england-death-data-revised/

And the reason for doing this with covid and not with flu?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, onewheeldave said:

 

And the reason for doing this with covid and not with flu?

Does it make any difference in a discussion about covid (apart from HMG wanting to show fewer covid deaths)?

 

It certainly reduces deaths attributable to covid but not flu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Longcol said:

Does it make any difference in a discussion about covid (apart from HMG wanting to show fewer covid deaths)?

 

It certainly reduces deaths attributable to covid but not flu.

It just seems strange that for flu, and pretty much any other disease, death stats attempt to log the actual deaths caused by the disease, whereas covid deaths are 'within 28 days of contracting...'.

Personally, in terms of planning for the futrure pandemics, I would have thought that accurate death stats for the current one, would be a priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, onewheeldave said:

It just seems strange that for flu, and pretty much any other disease, death stats attempt to log the actual deaths caused by the disease, whereas covid deaths are 'within 28 days of contracting...'.

Personally, in terms of planning for the futrure pandemics, I would have thought that accurate death stats for the current one, would be a priority.

So would I, but HMG in their wisdom wanted to show fewer deaths attributable to covid in their daily announcements last year.

 

The ONS statistics still include all deaths  - ie those recorded on the death certificate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, onewheeldave said:

It just seems strange that for flu, and pretty much any other disease, death stats attempt to log the actual deaths caused by the disease, whereas covid deaths are 'within 28 days of contracting...'.

Personally, in terms of planning for the futrure pandemics, I would have thought that accurate death stats for the current one, would be a priority.

WHO guidelines suggest taking the higher value, the doctor certified deaths caused by covid.

 

The lower number, "deaths within 28 days"  is available daily whereas the higher number only weekly and as Longcol says makes the govt look better.

 

Cause of death is generally a bit of a mess. I think there are 'default' causes of death  which are often filled in when there is nothing obvious ( maybe heart failure?). I am a dubious that every flu death actually has a confirmed case of flu.

 

For some purposes it may not matter. Often it is the change over time in these measures which is important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's news:

"Britain’s early handling of the coronavirus pandemic was one of the worst public health failures in UK history, with ministers and scientists taking a fatalistic approach that exacerbated the death toll, a landmark inquiry has found."

 

No doubt the Johnson propaganda machine will be hailing their handling of the pandemic as a success, in much the same way as branding the evacuation of Afghanistan as "magnificent."   Already a "government spokesman" is intoning "quick and decisive action" was taken.

 

Liars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To my mind the biggest lesson that can be learned is that the preceding years of lack of funding to essential services,particularly health care caused deaths and subsequent extraordinary spending from the magic money tree that apparently did not exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, onewheeldave said:

True.

How about just counting the actual deaths that were actually caused by covid?

 

16 hours ago, onewheeldave said:

Of course, goes without saying. However the same applies to flu, yet we have flu death stats without any of this bizarre 'Died within 28 days of contracting flu'.

Again, you do know how covid works and what it does? its different to flu, flu is respiratory, whereas covid can affect every organ in your body including heart and brain, if you have a dodgy ticker, covid can put additional stress on it which may give you a heart attack, so you died of a heart attack, BUT if you were found to have had covid 28 days preceeding they know covid probably played a part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just a general enquiry. Does a person in good health, in their fifties, who has already had two jabs of the Corona vaccine still have to have the booster jab.? Or is the booster just for older people ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, pattricia said:

This is just a general enquiry. Does a person in good health, in their fifties, who has already had two jabs of the Corona vaccine still have to have the booster jab.? Or is the booster just for older people ?

Nobody has to have the booster. It is however available to healthy people in their fifties, amongst others, from six months after their second jab.

 

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/coronavirus-booster-vaccine/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.