58 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

I respectfully urge you to read the book (the classic on death and dying). The vast majority who get C19 will self isolate and recover and I'd be amazed if the mortality rate is anywhere near 1%. Most who pass will have other health conditions and be Elderly (not all but most).

Thank you for the book recommendation, I’ll return the favor by respectfully suggesting you read some books on statistics.

1 hour ago, Forethat said:

Have you not been paying attention to what I've written?

Yes I have. I also responded the last time you quoted and replied to my query. 

 

My response being that covid19 is a notifiable disease and so must by law be mentioned on the death certificate, even though it may not have been the cause of death. 

 

I even included a copy of such a certificate. 

 

But for some reason that response was deemed of topic and removed. 

 

Obviously if the deceased did not have covid19 it would not be mentioned on the death certificate. 

13 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Yes I have. I also responded the last time you quoted and replied to my query. 

 

My response being that covid19 is a notifiable disease and so must by law be mentioned on the death certificate, even though it may not have been the cause of death. 

 

I even included a copy of such a certificate. 

 

But for some reason that response was deemed of topic and removed. 

 

Obviously if the deceased did not have covid19 it would not be mentioned on the death certificate. 

This ‘even though it may not have been the cause of death’ is pretty easy to eliminate as a variable in large populations.

 

COVID-19 kills within a known period of time, you either recover within that time or you die.

 

For any given disease the probability of dying within a period of time is also very well known.

 

Scale that to thousands of death and the probability of dying of disease A given suffering COVID-19 can be nailed down to within a very small margin of error, thus enabling the ‘even may not be the cause of death’ to be eliminated within the same margin of error.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 20, 20206 yr by Chomper Higgot

From previous global crises, it seems that the reported totals of deaths at the time is always less than the real total. There's a good chance the real total is much more than 15% higher.

4 minutes ago, chessman said:

From previous global crises, it seems that the reported totals of deaths at the time is always less than the real total. There's a good chance the real total is much more than 15% higher.

Indeed. 

 

But the scandal here is that the government are deliberately under reporting the deaths by only counting those which occur in hospital. 

11 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Indeed. 

 

But the scandal here is that the government are deliberately under reporting the deaths by only counting those which occur in hospital. 

The government can only report on deaths caused by COVID-19 that have been reported as a death caused by COVID-19. It's not that hard to comprehend, is it?

 

Extraordinary that this is seen as a scandal. With the same kind of logic as the one you apply to this I could say that it's a scandal that the government didn't report the 3,000 deaths caused by alien insemination.

23 minutes ago, chessman said:

From previous global crises, it seems that the reported totals of deaths at the time is always less than the real total. There's a good chance the real total is much more than 15% higher.

Most likely. But what do you expect the government to do? Take to Twitter to count the people that allegedly died from COVID-19 (because a nurse in a care home is confident that's the case)?

Edited April 20, 20206 yr by Forethat

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

COVID-19 kills within a known period of time, you either recover within that time or you die.

Can you please post a link to the COVID-19 manual where the known period of time is specified?

21 minutes ago, Forethat said:

The government can only report on deaths caused by COVID-19 that have been reported as a death caused by COVID-19. It's not that hard to comprehend, is it?

 

But they are not doing that. They only report deaths that have occurred in hospitals. 

 

They ignore all others, even where the virus is given as the cause of death. 

 

Furthermore, according to the Daily Mail, at least one hospital trust is suggesting that doctors leave coronavirus of the death certificate entirely, even if it was the direct cause of death. 

To add some additional facts to this discussion, Italy issued a report based on 19,996 COVID-19 related deaths. The report included data recorded until April 16th.

 

Gender

Women: 34.7% 

Men: 65.3% 

 

Age

Average age: 79

0-9 years old: 2

10-19 years old: 0

20-29 years old: 7

30-39 years old: 40

40-49 years old: 178

50-59 years old: 756

60-69 years old: 2,284

70-79 years old: 6,203

80-89 years old: 8,070

90+ years old: 2,455

 

Comorbidities (based on 1,738 deaths)

At least one underlying condition: 96.4%

One underlying condition: 14.4%

Two underlying conditions: 20.7%

Three or more underlying conditions: 61.3%

 

Other

There were 49 fatalities under 40 years old. Medical records were available for 43 of them. 35 had serious pathologies (cardiovascular, renal (kidney), psychiatric, diabetes, obesity). 8 of them had no existing major pathologies.

 

 

42 minutes ago, Forethat said:

The government can only report on deaths caused by COVID-19 that have been reported as a death caused by COVID-19. It's not that hard to comprehend, is it?

 

Extraordinary that this is seen as a scandal. With the same kind of logic as the one you apply to this I could say that it's a scandal that the government didn't report the 3,000 deaths caused by alien insemination.

The ONS has revealed data that demonstrates the Government have been under reporting COVID-19 deaths.

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The ONS has revealed data that demonstrates the Government have been under reporting COVID-19 deaths.

Do you have a link?

 

 

48 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Most likely. But what do you expect the government to do? Take to Twitter to count the people that allegedly died from COVID-19 (because a nurse in a care home is confident that's the case)?

No, they’ll rely on data available and statistical analysis, just like they do for every other data they use.

Just now, Forethat said:

Do you have a link?

 

 

No, but I can direct you to read the OP.

25 minutes ago, Forethat said:

To add some additional facts to this discussion, Italy issued a report based on 19,996 COVID-19 related deaths. The report included data recorded until April 16th.

 

Gender

Women: 34.7% 

Men: 65.3% 

 

Age

Average age: 79

0-9 years old: 2

10-19 years old: 0

20-29 years old: 7

30-39 years old: 40

40-49 years old: 178

50-59 years old: 756

60-69 years old: 2,284

70-79 years old: 6,203

80-89 years old: 8,070

90+ years old: 2,455

 

Comorbidities (based on 1,738 deaths)

At least one underlying condition: 96.4%

One underlying condition: 14.4%

Two underlying conditions: 20.7%

Three or more underlying conditions: 61.3%

 

Other

There were 49 fatalities under 40 years old. Medical records were available for 43 of them. 35 had serious pathologies (cardiovascular, renal (kidney), psychiatric, diabetes, obesity). 8 of them had no existing major pathologies.

 

 

Yes we know that people already weakens by underlying disease are more likely to be killed by COVID-19.

 

 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Yes we know that people already weakens by underlying disease are more likely to be killed by COVID-19.

 

 

If you have data that includes a higher number of fatalities, please feel free to provide some information.

25 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No, but I can direct you to read the OP.

Hehe, the OP doesn't show that someone is underreporting. It proves exactly my point - there IS a difference between suspected and confirmed. That's the whole issue.

 

You can of course speculate and come up with as many tinfoil theories as you like. Evidently. But if you want an answer to the question why, you can go back and read my posts again. I think I've over-clarified this ten times too many already.

 

How about that alien insemination, did they report that? Huh? Huh? I bet you wonder why they under report that all the time..

Edited April 20, 20206 yr by Forethat

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

COVID-19 kills within a known period of time, you either recover within that time or you die

 

Did you have link where the known period is specified? A COVID-19 manual, perhaps. Or maybe not?

A post using a  Twitter post has been removed:

 

18) Social Media content is not to be used as  source material unless it is from a recognized or approved news media source,  the source of any such material (Twitter, Facebook  etc.) should always be shown.

 

An inflammatory post has been reported and removed. 

 

 

If the inflammatory postings continues, warnings will be coming soon. 

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The ONS has revealed data that demonstrates the Government have been under reporting COVID-19 deaths.

 

1 hour ago, Forethat said:

Do you have a link?

 

For England and Wales see

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19englandandwales/deathsoccurringinmarch2020

and links contained therein. 

 

 

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

 

 

For England and Wales see

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19englandandwales/deathsoccurringinmarch2020

and links contained therein. 

But, hehe, that link doesn't show that anyone has been underreporting anything. The under reporting is your (as well as others) suspicion. Nothing else. 

 

What I have done is provide you with an explanation to show WHY there is a discrepancy between Government reported numbers and ONS analysis. Here, page 17 in the report you refer to but apparently haven't read:

That report, which contains the one in the OP, includes all the deaths from the virus no matter where they occurred. The government figures only contain those which occurred in hospital. 

 

You can make as many condescending posts and childish remarks about alien insemination as you like, they won't alter that fact. 

 

No doubt you will now make yet another post in which you believe that you are proving how much more intelligent than everyone else you are. Go ahead, my attitude is identical to that expressed by Rhett Butler as he walked out of the door for the last time. 

7 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

That report, which contains the one in the OP, includes all the deaths from the virus no matter where they occurred. The government figures only contain those which occurred in hospital. 

No, you're not reading the information correctly. The Government report on cases that HAVE BEEN TESTED POSITIVE for COVID-19. It's even in the report YOU referred to:

"Definitions of coronavirus (COVID-19) deaths between different sources". It's there in black and white. So in essence, both ONS and the Government have published information that shows exactly how wrong you are. I've linked to it several times. You would think that'd be enough...

 

Obviously, this is a result of not testing for COVID-19 outside NHS hospitals (I've pointed this out several times). That's what I've been trying to tell you (with mixed result, to say the very least). 

 

YOU seem to believe that the Government run a query based on ONS data, deliberately omitting stats. They don't. I get it, you want the Government to report on cases where SARS-CoV-2 hasn't been tested positive. And that's exactly where ONS can step in and provide an analysis to display a picture where PROBABLE cases are included. But the Government can't report them as confirmed COVID-19 related fatalities. Sorry, It won't happen.

 

20 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

You can make as many condescending posts and childish remarks about alien insemination as you like, they won't alter that fact. 

 

No doubt you will now make yet another post in which you believe that you are proving how much more intelligent than everyone else you are. Go ahead, my attitude is identical to that expressed by Rhett Butler as he walked out of the door for the last time. 

I have proven what causes the discrepancy between ONS analysis and Government reports. Judging by your written language I take it the coin has finally dropped? Don't get upset though, pay attention instead, and you'll learn something new. 

1 hour ago, Forethat said:

Did you have link where the known period is specified? A COVID-19 manual, perhaps. Or maybe not?

Are you suggesting a known period between first infection and death doesn’t exist?

 

I’m not a medical professional, so I’ll guess a period of between 1st February and 14th April.

 

Is that the correct period? Almost certainly not but it does cover the period between the first announcement of a Coronavirus in the UK and the start of this thread (The period within which all COVID-19 infections under this discussion occurred.

 

The math is now exactly the same.

 

Probability of dying of (insert disease) between (1st Feb~14 April) Given Probability of dying from COVID-19.

 

The larger the population the more accurate the result.

 

The shorter the ‘known period’ the more accurate the result.

 

And, it is not necessary to test every case to get an accurate calculation of how many people are being killed by COVID-19.

 

Edited April 20, 20206 yr by Chomper Higgot

8 minutes ago, Forethat said:

No, you're not reading the information correctly. The Government report on cases that HAVE BEEN TESTED POSITIVE for COVID-19. It's even in the report YOU referred to:

"Definitions of coronavirus (COVID-19) deaths between different sources". It's there in black and white. So in essence, both ONS and the Government have published information that shows exactly how wrong you are. I've linked to it several times. You would think that'd be enough...

 

Obviously, this is a result of not testing for COVID-19 outside NHS hospitals (I've pointed this out several times). That's what I've been trying to tell you (with mixed result, to say the very least). 

 

YOU seem to believe that the Government run a query based on ONS data, deliberately omitting stats. They don't. I get it, you want the Government to report on cases where SARS-CoV-2 hasn't been tested positive. And that's exactly where ONS can step in and provide an analysis to display a picture where PROBABLE cases are included. But the Government can't report them as confirmed COVID-19 related fatalities. Sorry, It won't happen.

 

I have proven what causes the discrepancy between ONS analysis and Government reports. Judging by your written language I take it the coin has finally dropped? Don't get upset though, pay attention instead, and you'll learn something new. 

No you’ve demonstrated the fallacy being perpetrated by the government.

 

From your own example, the Government is reporting:

 

“Deaths where patients have been tested for COVID-19.” 

 

If no tests are done the Government will be reporting zero deaths.

 

And by corollary, if a test wasn’t done then the cause of death wasn’t COVID-19.

 

5 hours ago, Forethat said:

Have you not been paying attention to what I've written?

 

I'll clarify once more:

The reason why the government cannot account for care home deaths caused by COVID-19 is that the deaths are not recorded as such as long as they aren't tested. Having a "hunch" isn't enough. In cases where the patient has been tested but not been confirmed positive they CAN state COVID-19 as direct cause of death and later share the result. In cases where they HAVE NOT been tested they are told to use clinical judgement. I can GUARANTEE that very few, if any, doctors will enter COVID-19 as the direct cause of death in these situations. Instead, this WILL be "pneumonitis", "acute renal failure", "sepsis" or something similar. That's the issue. They're not tested and therefore the death certificate doesn't indicate that they died from COVID-19. As a result, they are not included in the data.

 

Now you can stop wondering why the government didn't announce the figures for care homes.

The symptoms are fairly specific and well defined.

We all know the reason why they are not being recorded. Its because the UK did not want to break the 1000 deaths per day psychological level.

I know that.

You know that.

Why are you defending the indefensible?   

24 minutes ago, Forethat said:

I have proven what causes the discrepancy between ONS analysis and Government reports.

No, you haven't. We all know what causes the discrepancy. For starters it's in the OP! The government only reports deaths in hospitals, the ONS reports all deaths. 

 

A fact now acknowledged by the government as their daily spokesperson now says they are reporting hospital deaths. 

 

33 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Judging by your written language I take it the coin has finally dropped? Don't get upset though, pay attention instead, and you'll learn something new. 

You simply cannot help yourself. Your supercilious condescension is ever present. 

 

But, as the aforementioned Mr. Butler said......(look it up). 

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

No, you haven't. We all know what causes the discrepancy. For starters it's in the OP! The government only reports deaths in hospitals, the ONS reports all deaths. 

No, they report cases where the patient has tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. And as I pointed out it is clearly defined in the ONS analysis. I even included a screenshot. Here is is again:

 

13 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

A fact now acknowledged by the government as their daily spokesperson now says they are reporting hospital deaths. 

You must have access to something completely different than the official reports as they state the reported deaths are "Hospital deaths where the patient tested positive".

 

 

5 minutes ago, Forethat said:

No, they report cases where the patient has tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. And as I pointed out it is clearly defined in the ONS analysis. I even included a screenshot. Here is is again:

 

You must have access to something completely different than the official reports as they state the reported deaths are "Hospital deaths where the patient tested positive".

 

 

Right so the governments total incompetence in testing is reason enough to declare that people dying who have not been tested is an excuse for reporting the low figures.

OK no problem. Glad we clarified that.

 

59 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

The symptoms are fairly specific and well defined.

We all know the reason why they are not being recorded. Its because the UK did not want to break the 1000 deaths per day psychological level.

I know that.

You know that.

Why are you defending the indefensible?   

I have absolutely no clue if someone is deliberately manipulating the numbers. Personally, I want to believe that it'd be easier for the Government to defend their actions - or lack of actions - causing a shortage of PPE etc. if the number of fatalities was HIGHER. So if there was a reason to cook up the books it might be in the direction opposite to the one you suggest. But that's not something I'd be prepared to debate, for the simple reason that I don't know. The same way none of you doesn't know anything of what you claim in the post quoted above.

 

But now you're telling me there's an exact number that UK doesn't want to break for psychological reasons. Where do you people find this information where these specifications and conspiracies are revealed? Sounds like a People's Front of Judea gathering, if you ask me. 

 

I'm not defending anything (another thing you fail to comprehend). What I HAVE done is to explain WHY there is a discrepancy between the numbers reported by the Government and the analysis performed by ONS. In terms of statistical accuracy, I am more concerned with the number of cases where patients died in a care home and COVID-19 wasn't even mentioned on the death certificate.

 

Just to point out; not even ONS knows how many patients died today from COVID-19. And yet you want the Government to include them in their report? And when they don't they are deliberately cooking the books?

Edited April 20, 20206 yr by Forethat