The Lemon Fool

There has been a misleading claim going around social media recently saying only 17,000 people have died in the UK from Covid.
I've posted a link to the official ONS debunking below, but in summary, 17,000 with no other pre-existing medical condition have died from Covid.
In order to think these were the only deaths caused by Covid, you'd have to assume that within 28 days of catching Covid, everyone with a pre-existing condition died from that condition, and not Covid. (The most common pre-existing condition is diabetes).

It is valid to say that only 17,000 completely healthy people have died from Covid in the UK. As we know, healthy people are much less likely to die from Covid.

https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2022/01/26/to-s ... isleading/

Similar to a bad influenza year then?

BullDog wrote:Similar to a bad influenza year then?

Not really, because people dying from 'flu usually have all manner of co-morbidities. Unlike that 17,000 covid deaths figure.

The simple response to the 17,000 figure is to tell them to look at the excess deaths graph. Unless there is some other unknown disease wiping out large numbers of the populace, the only sane interpretation is that it is Covid that is causing the large spikes. It is irrelevant that some of those dying has some other malady. If the other malady was fatal, it would not contribute to excess deaths - it would appear in the normal distribution.
In a previous contribution I wrote

Go have a look at the excess deaths statistics - i.e. comparisons of the deaths between recent years - and look at the significant spikes. In England and Wales the 2020 peak was around 12,000 per week, and the 2021 peak was around 6,000 per week. The total number of excess deaths (in England and Wales) in 2020 was around 76000.

The cohort without comorbidities is mostly young and by definition healthy. They tend not to die of anything.* You could compare the background rate of death for this cohort against the 17,000 deaths. It's hard to get reliable numbers for this vaguely defined cohort, but figures I've heard from the US suggest that the 17,000 might be 20%-25% of the total deaths in this group.

*The main cause of death in this cohort is stupidity. It's much easier to vaccinate than fix stupidity (although the two are not unrelated).

Mike4 wrote:

BullDog wrote:Similar to a bad influenza year then?

Not really, because people dying from 'flu usually have all manner of co-morbidities. Unlike that 17,000 covid deaths figure.

See these oranges? how do you like them apples?

servodude wrote:

Mike4 wrote:

BullDog wrote:Similar to a bad influenza year then?

Not really, because people dying from 'flu usually have all manner of co-morbidities. Unlike that 17,000 covid deaths figure.

See these oranges? how do you like them apples?

Quite!

I do find myself wondering about the genuine comarible figure. How many people die of 'flu in a year, who have nothing other than 'flu mentioned on the death certificate as a contributing factor?

None, I suspect.

How would one go about finding out?

As I understand it the definition of death from Covid-19 used for that approx 17,000 figure was that Covid-19 was the sole cause of death listed on the death certificate. Using that definition I wonder how many people would qualify as dying from cancer, heart attack, stroke etc and by exclusion from all so-defined causes of deaths how many people each year would die of absolutely nothing. My mother had CCF, COPD and hospital-acquired pneumonia listed as the three causes of death on her death certificate so on that <to “genuinely” die of something it must be the one and only cause listed on the death certificate> criteria she died of neither CCF, COPD nor pneumonia so would fall into the died-of-nothing category. Picking up in Mike’s astute observation and going one step further it would be interesting to see how the flu deaths would look over the last few decades if recalculated to use that one-and-only-cause-of-death selection criteria.

- Julian

There is a great segment debunking the "only 17,000" claim on this week's edition of Radio-4 "More or Less" - well worth a listen
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0013r9w

The reality is that the excess death count is over 150000.

PhaseThree wrote:The reality is that the excess death count is over 150000.

Or two people in one thousand, or less.

Lootman wrote:

PhaseThree wrote:The reality is that the excess death count is over 150000.

Or two people in one thousand, or less.

Curious, put that way, because most people in my circle of acquaintances know someone who died with covid. If not actually of it.

Perhaps your circle of acquaintances is quite large, by the time you include your cousin's stepmum's best friend, or whatever, whose demise you might hear about.

I think "more or less"should be required hearing for everyone.

I don't think I know anytime who's died of it.i know (of) a few who've been hospitalised. My wife is still not quite back to normal after catching it in October. Sadly I also know a marriage broken by one partner become drawn into conspiracy theories.

Lootman wrote:

PhaseThree wrote:The reality is that the excess death count is over 150000.

Or two people in one thousand, or less.

UK cancer deaths are also around two people in one thousand. (166,000 per year).

zico wrote:UK cancer deaths are also around two people in one thousand. (166,000 per year).

I think the normal response is "...and we don't shut down society for that! people are happy with that kind of rate!"

and then someone points out "...but the covid deaths are with that being done. They're at the level they are at only because of the efforts taken. you could expect them to be an order worse for a population the age of the UK if the original plan of sweet fanny adams was undertaken"

etc.. etc..
rinse repeat

now that's done it's pub time

-sd

zico wrote:

Lootman wrote:

PhaseThree wrote:The reality is that the excess death count is over 150000.

Or two people in one thousand, or less.

UK cancer deaths are also around two people in one thousand. (166,000 per year).

On a similarly irrelevant note, I should point out you don't catch Cancer from someone by sitting opposite them in a Cafe, although Cancer care, treatment, and support only costs the UK approx £24bn per annum.

Paul

DrFfybes wrote:

zico wrote:

PhaseThree wrote:The reality is that the excess death count is over 150000.

Or two people in one thousand, or less.

UK cancer deaths are also around two people in one thousand. (166,000 per year).

On a similarly irrelevant note, I should point out you don't catch Cancer from someone by sitting opposite them in a Cafe, although Cancer care, treatment, and support only costs the UK approx £24bn per annum.

Paul

Yes indeed!

contagious
- n. "one who takes a long time to understand something"

-sd

DrFfybes wrote:

zico wrote:

Lootman wrote:

PhaseThree wrote:The reality is that the excess death count is over 150000.

Or two people in one thousand, or less.

UK cancer deaths are also around two people in one thousand. (166,000 per year).

On a similarly irrelevant note, I should point out you don't catch Cancer from someone by sitting opposite them in a Cafe, although Cancer care, treatment, and support only costs the UK approx £24bn per annum.

Paul

Agreed. But it's important to consider the "something" that is done about it and the media focus on that "something" too and see how rational and balanced that is. They are arguably preventable deaths too.

The "somethings" will be different, and the implications of not doing those "somethings" different as well due to the contagious nature, or not. Just like with flu in a normal, or bad, year.

Covid is novel and new (despite many getting incrementally bored by it over the last 2 years). That isn't the case with cancer, or flu. It doesn't mean non-Covid deaths should be ignored by the authorities or the media, and at least (sensible) comparisons should be made on how those causes of deaths are seen and responded to by society.

Many will gravitate to their respective ends of the spectrum of debate though seeing it as "no different" or "irrelevant" (it's contagious!) etc.

If someone dies of cancer and also has diabetes, is that a cancer death?

My father in law died of "multiple organ failure" 10 years ago at 61 years of age he had had lung cancer and had been through treatment for two years, he was on his last legs after an operation on his lungs. He also was obese, wheelchair bound for 10 years after a spinal injury and had type two diabetes. Which statistics does he come under?

In the past three years:

My mother had had a torn aorta and hypertension for 10 years and died aged 90 of a bleed on the brain possibly caused by the Warfarin she was on, did the hypertension kill her or was it the stroke? Or was it the medication?

My father had prostate cancer for ten years, he had been told then he had 5 years to live, he had had drugs to keep it under control for that time but they had finally stopped being effective and he was in end stage when they gave him radiotherapy to help him with him symptoms. He died within a month of the radiotherapy that really knocked him out and he had two strokes within a week of each other. Did the stroke kill him or was it the cancer?
Or was it the treatment? Or was it the fact that he had to wait for over four hours for any treatment at the hospital due to them being overloaded as a result of covid?

My brother in law died aged 56, he had oesophageal cancer diagnosed three years ago. (If you can choose your way to go I'd advise against choosing this one) He went through several rounds of chemo and radiotherapy plus a major 9 hour operation. He finally chose to take part in an experimental procedure that resulted in his emergency hospitalisation during which time due to misunderstanding and miscommunication he was not fed for a week. There is an ongoing investigation into his death. Another one chalked down to "multiple organ failure". But of course the cancer killed him really.

Cause of death is not a simple or straightforward thing to determine. People who try to use these statistics for their own political ends are beneath contempt IMHO.

John

redsturgeon wrote:If someone dies of cancer and also has diabetes, is that a cancer death?
...

That was exactly my point re my understanding of the criteria for selecting the deaths to be included in that approx. 17,000 Covid-19 deaths count. If one were categorising all deaths using that same strict criteria then no, that "someone" would not have counted as dying from either cancer or diabetes. In fact one would not allowed to include them as a death in any category. That says to me what an artificial and meaningless exercise the generation of that approx. 17,000 "pure" Covid-19 deaths figure was.

- Julian

Mike4 wrote:How many people die of 'flu in a year, who have nothing other than 'flu mentioned on the death certificate as a contributing factor?

None, I suspect.

How would one go about finding out?

It's in one of the ONS reports - something like 1 in 6 of people dying with flu are actually dying of flu, whereas for Covid-19 those numbers are reversed.

Covid is not flu.