BBC News: Average 13 covid deaths per day, in the last 7 days.

It is although I know someone who died last week and is one of those statistics so it brings it home a bit . First person I know who's even had it never mind died from it.
The deaths are coming down though and that's good news 👍
 
Using the historical method the average is 62 per day.

Using the new 28 day cut-off from test reporting the average is 11 per day for the last week. For the previous 7 days the average was 8 per day so deaths are actually increasing by this method. 😲

Using a 60 day cut-off from test the average is 22 per day.

Pick your method of reporting. 🤔
 
If the virus hospital admissions and deaths continue to fall at this rate, surely we will be able to return to Bloomfield Rd sooner than we thought.
 
Last edited:
bollieboy said:
Using the historical method the average is 62 per day.

Using the new 28 day cut-off from test reporting the average is 11 per day for the last week. For the previous 7 days the average was 8 per day so deaths are actually increasing by this method. 😲

Using a 60 day cut-off from test the average is 22 per day.

Pick your method of reporting. 🤔
Click to expand...
maybe they should count the number who died as a direct result of covid - just a thought.
 
bollieboy said:
Using the historical method the average is 62 per day.
Click to expand...

Using some very rough and ready stats, about 1,500 people die per day in the UK, best guess seems to be about 6% of the population have had the virus, you'd therefore expect about 90 per day to die having previously had the virus, obviously not all those who pass away will have been tested positive but by now it's probably a larger proportion than it would've been at the start of the outbreak.

Make of that what you like, to me that "historical method" seems to now be mostly picking up co-incidental cases rather than causative ones.
 
It ain't that straightforward that's why.

Actually having 3 different reporting methods isn't an issue if the basis of the reporting method is clear and understood.

Unfortunately the majority of people won't be bothered to, or won't be able to understand, the difference between each method and why each method is valid but have their individual flaws.
 
Yes they seem to be like Fifth Columnists wanting the country to fail. Like that supposed Magic Grandad muppet.
 
Lost Seasider said:
How do you define that?
Click to expand...
by only including where there was no other primary reason, e.g. being hit by a bus.

From day 1 doctors were instructed to put covid on the balance of probabilities without even testing.

moving the goalposts all the time is a joke- no one really knows the UK impact and whether the crippling measures introduced were necessary, and whether the current measures should be fully eased.
 
Last edited:
Halifax71 said:
by only including where there was no other primary reason, e.g. being hit by a bus.

From day 1 doctors were instructed to put covid on the balance of probabilities without even testing.

moving the goalposts all the time is a joke- no one really knows the UK impact and whether the crippling measures introduced were necessary, and whether the current measures should be fully eased.
Click to expand...
All 3 methods above include deaths only where there has been a positive test for Covid-19.
 
bollieboy said:
'From day 1 doctors were instructed to put covid on the balance of probabilities without even testing. '

I am saying that what you stated was incorrect.
Click to expand...
whilst it was from the April / May it looks legit. Any reason to believe it isn't?

 
Halifax71 said:
whilst it was from the April / May it looks legit. Any reason to believe it isn't?

Click to expand...
But those deaths are not included in the daily figures quoted above or in the daily reporting since the beginning of the pandemic.

Yes, there may have been some deaths where the primary cause was not Covid-19 and the death was coincedental included in those figures. On the flip side the daily numbers do not include people who have died of Covid-19 but have not been tested.

The weekly ONS deaths survey attempts to rationalise the two sets of date. Coincedentally the last weekly report reported the same number of deaths as per the 60 day cut-off method of daily reporting.

As stated previously there is no simple method of accounting number of Covid-19 deaths which is fine if the people using the data understand the basis used.
 
bollieboy said:
Using the historical method the average is 62 per day.

Using the new 28 day cut-off from test reporting the average is 11 per day for the last week. For the previous 7 days the average was 8 per day so deaths are actually increasing by this method. 😲

Using a 60 day cut-off from test the average is 22 per day.

Pick your method of reporting. 🤔
Click to expand...

Sponsored by Confused.com
 
clappers said:
Sponsored by Confused.com
Click to expand...
Add to that the weekly ONS analysis of death registration and the ONS periodic review of excess deaths. They all tell a story and give useful information but you do need to understand the method of accounting (and their pros and cons).
 
From Professor Carl Heneghan Centre for Evidence Based Medicine

"The disparity between the numbers according to the ONS criteria and those reported by Public Health England is more marked than before. PHE deaths are currently between 2 and 3 times higher than ONS."

Picture2.png


www.cebm.net

ONS Death Data update and Disparity with PHE – - The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine

Jason Oke, Carl Heneghan The latest release from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on deaths registered in England and
www.cebm.net www.cebm.net
 
So you can see as far back as the beginning of June PHE were misreporting deaths and the disparity has got wider and wider week on week and continues to do so.
 
Ormergod said:
So you can see as far back as the beginning of June PHE were misreporting deaths and the disparity has got wider and wider week on week and continues to do so.
Click to expand...
And pre-June PHE were under reporting deaths (when compared with ONS death registration data) due to Covid-19 as the daily reporting required a positive test. Since June there has been over reporting due to deaths due to other reasons following a positive death (hence the introduction of 28 days and 60 days cut-off reporting).

ONS reported deaths, where Covid-19 was the underlying cause (46,736 until the end of June) is still greater than those reported by PHE.
 
Scaramanga said:
I just can’t wrap my head around some people on here. Some just seem to thrive on negativity and just cant see or refuse to see anything positive at all.
Click to expand...

Scaremonger.

You remind me of the officer on the Titanic who commented that a quarter of the ship was still above water.... 2 minutes later!!!!
 
Indeed this is good news and hopefully will continue to drop in the coming days.

I also hope that the increase in cases is picking up a mutated Coronavirus strain (akin to the summer cold) which is less debilitating and less lethal.
 
bollieboy said:
Using the historical method the average is 62 per day.

Using the new 28 day cut-off from test reporting the average is 11 per day for the last week. For the previous 7 days the average was 8 per day so deaths are actually increasing by this method. 😲

Using a 60 day cut-off from test the average is 22 per day.

Pick your method of reporting. 🤔
Click to expand...
I was going to say, the 7 day average shows a slight increase for both infections and deaths. The danger is people will just switch off and things get worse.
 
cruzzer said:
Indeed this is good news and hopefully will continue to drop in the coming days.

I also hope that the increase in cases is picking up a mutated Coronavirus strain (akin to the summer cold) which is less debilitating and less lethal.
Click to expand...
The worst mistake we've made is calling it a strain of flu. It's not and that leads to a false sense of security, especially among those who claim time off work every year with flu, when they've got a mild cold.
 
Wizaard said:
The worst mistake we've made is calling it a strain of flu. It's not and that leads to a false sense of security, especially among those who claim time off work every year with flu, when they've got a mild cold.
Click to expand...
I agree but ultimately Coronavirus is a cold virus. So a mutated strain could be showing positive to tests but it might not be full blown CV19.

Pure speculation!
 
Bristol_Avenue said:
Isn't the ONS figure where Covid is "mentioned" on the death certificate. i.e. it may or may not be the primary cause.
Click to expand...
It is - so may be a contributory cause rather than primary cause.

For example a terminally cancer patient, with a few months to live, caught Covid-19 and subsequently died before they would have expected to from the cancer alone they would have the specific cancer as the primary cause and Covid-19 as a contributory cause on the death certificate.

Similarly a Covid-19 patient who subsequently developed pneumonia which then resulted in death would have Covid-19 as a primary cause and pneumonia as a contributory cause on the death certificate.

As stated previously there is no black and white method of accounting Covid-19 deaths.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top