-Removed-A remarkable assertion considering just two pages ago I gave figures from England alone that indicated 53,000 excess deaths since March 20th, almost 12,000 more than the total officially reported COVID deaths in the entire UK. And you obviously read that post since you responded to it (without actually addressing the point however).
- Joined
- 11 Nov 14
- Moves
- 38428
@no1marauder saidThat's an interesting point. Do we have the 'above expected deaths' for all countries that we can compare with their declared Covid deaths, and see which country is most manipulating the figures?
I don't think so; the number of excess deaths in England alone since March 20th exceeds the reported COVID-19 death toll in the UK by almost 12,000:
Excess deaths 53,238 https://fingertips.phe.org.uk/static-reports/mortality-surveillance/excess-mortality-in-england-latest.html
Reported COVID deaths in the entire UK: 41, 433. https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
Do you have them for USA, Spain, France and, dare one ask, China?
In reply to the inevitable snipe from D64, in which I seem to be mentioned in the same post as 'jingoistic brits', I think there are few of my posts relating to C19 in which I have not criticised Boris' handling of the pandemic, certainly none in which I have jingoistically praised him.
Here's a new release that tracks the introduction of the virus into America.
As we can see, it is a new variant of the virus and THAT is why America took it
much harder than Asian nations, NOT because China is so superior in how they
combatted the virus.
None of the biotech executives at the meeting noticed the uninvited guest. They had flown to Boston from across the globe for the annual leadership meeting of the drug company Biogen, and they were busy catching up with colleagues and hobnobbing with upper management. For two days they shook hands, kissed cheeks, passed each other the salad tongs at the hotel buffet, never realizing that one among their number carried the coronavirus in their lungs.
A very good read.
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Genetic-data-show-how-a-single-superspreading-15512903.php
- Joined
- 11 Nov 14
- Moves
- 38428
@Duchess64
I name checked you in my reply to No 1 because you chipped in with your 'jingoistic' post in reply to mine at the same time as him.
It's there for all to see.
I guess if you can't provide China's increase in average deaths over, say, the last 12 months then no one can.
@petewxyz saidIt looks like it will never be any less fatal than the flu virus so for people like me it will be a yearly vaccine shot that allows me to view social and workplace gathering the way I did pre covid but younger / healthier people may well be able to resume normality a lot sooner, as mentioned a lot of them already have, but fingers crossed successive mutations will take the virus in the right direction. However I think we should be in amber alert for the next virus, the global village isn’t all real ale and summer fete’s.
It's going to be a massive call when somebody has to say it's over. I think the issue at the moment is determining the best way of knowing when we have arrived at that point. When viral epidemics end it doesn't mean the virus is gone. People will have episodes of illness with that virus in years when there is no epidemic. We are highly unlikely to get to the point where the ...[text shortened]... trend for serious illness cases or prevalence and trend for positive test results in the community?
@kevcvs57 saidOf course the government were told to be on Amber alert after SARS but didn't react. For me the learning should be not to cut the health service to the bones, but only yesterday somebody told me about rumours regarding cuts on the way.
It looks like it will never be any less fatal than the flu virus so for people like me it will be a yearly vaccine shot that allows me to view social and workplace gathering the way I did pre covid but younger / healthier people may well be able to resume normality a lot sooner, as mentioned a lot of them already have, but fingers crossed successive mutations will take the ...[text shortened]... hould be in amber alert for the next virus, the global village isn’t all real ale and summer fete’s.
Pre COVID the health service had so little slack that it creaked horribly every winter and more nurses were leaving the profession than joining. We simply didn't have the slack to staff the field hospitals created and that was needed. At least 20% of deaths are thought to be attributable to taking COVID into areas of hospitals that might have been avoided if it had been possible to actually use field hospitals properly. Similarly PPE stores should not have been run down to save money.
The only way I will believe we are on Amber alert is when I see serious commitment to recruitment and retention of nurses with evidence that the NHS isn't beyond capacity every winter. It was published in the BMJ that we need 50,000 doctors to have as many per head of population as France but I have never seen comparisons for nurses which would be interesting.
@petewxyz saidThis is very true but I think the next government caught napping will not be able to feign surprise. If covid has taught us anything it’s that a robust and well funded NHS is essential if we don’t want to be forced to shut down our economy in order to stop our health services from crashing. An under funded, running at full capacity and beyond NHS is a false economy.
Of course the government were told to be on Amber alert after SARS but didn't react. For me the learning should be not to cut the health service to the bones, but only yesterday somebody told me about rumours regarding cuts on the way.
Pre COVID the health service had so little slack that it creaked horribly every winter and more nurses were leaving the profession than jo ...[text shortened]... ead of population as France but I have never seen comparisons for nurses which would be interesting.
@kevcvs57 saidI completely agree other than that nobody should buy into the idea that this government was caught by surprise. Various professors in Public Health had spelt out the risk to the government after the near miss with SARS. Basically this government gambled on cutting services to the bone and lost. It was kind of like deciding not to buy house insurance to make yourself appear richer and better at economic management.
This is very true but I think the next government caught napping will not be able to feign surprise. If covid has taught us anything it’s that a robust and well funded NHS is essential if we don’t want to be forced to shut down our economy in order to stop our health services from crashing. An under funded, running at full capacity and beyond NHS is a false economy.
@petewxyz saidYeah I’m sure your right that’s why I used the term ‘feign’ I think most governments utilise implausible deniability when caught with their pants down but any cuts to the NHS in the near future would resonate very badly with even the most pro government voter.
I completely agree other than that nobody should buy into the idea that this government was caught by surprise. Various professors in Public Health had spelt out the risk to the government after the near miss with SARS. Basically this government gambled on cutting services to the bone and lost. It was kind of like deciding not to buy house insurance to make yourself appear richer and better at economic management.
-Removed-The first sentence isn't a "fact" but the product of a change in definition that excludes deaths from COVID from the count IF they occur more than 28 days after a positive test. As there is no scientific basis for such change and as evidence indicates it reduces the official count by hundreds a week, you are pedaling misinformation as is your government.
For whatever reason, the UK's counts are far below excess deaths and were even before such statistical chicanery.
@no1marauder
They key here is that admissions are down. The hospital system is not currently overwhelmed in the U.K. and there is therefore hopefully a reduction to come in the unnecessary deaths caused by introducing the virus to people with serious illnesses and vulnerable staff within the hospital system. It was suggested a couple of weeks ago that that group made up 20% of total deaths in the U.K.
If the purpose of lockdown and then social distancing was to prevent the health system from being overwhelmed that has been achieved. The issue now is how do you gauge what is necessary to keep things at that level.
Perhaps @divegeester's point was that we are no longer causing avoidable deaths and simply getting the deaths that must inevitably occur with any serious illness and that even those seem to be tailing off.