Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Deaths Analysis 2020


Recommended Posts

the gardener
14 minutes ago, stokiescum said:

You need a hobby sir.ps don’t say you have one working stastics out

I'm married. 

  • Lol 1
  • Cheers 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
the gardener

Of course if we remove the estimated 36,000 or so excess non-covid home deaths from those figures (which we can pretty much label as lockdown / remove the NHS deaths) then we're pretty close to saying, "What fucking Pandemic?" 

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yadda yadda yadda
2 hours ago, the gardener said:

I have been looking at the death stats from the ONS. 

Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales, provisional - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

2020: up to week ending 1 January 2021

Now, if you total the deaths for 2020, week 1 to 53 you get 614,114.

The 5 year average for the each of those weeks 1-53 totals 539,083.

Therefore we have excess deaths above the 5 year average of 75,031.  This works out at 113.9% of the 5 year average.  Clearly then more people than normal died.  I haven't yet worked out if this is statistically significant but I suspect it is.

I took the data and worked out the % excess deaths for each week of 2020 over and above the 5 year average.  I also calculated a cumulative deaths total.

Some observations:

1) By week 10 (8 Mar 20) the cumulative deaths were 4,708 below the 5 year average - we had 96.1% of the 5ya deaths.

2) By week 14 (5 Apr 20) the figures were +2,271 - 101.4% of 5ya.  This is certainly not significant.

3) By week 21 (24 May 20) we had peaked at +51,486 and 121.9% of 5ya.  Probably quite significantly above average.

4) From then to week 38 it declined to +53,663 or 113.7% of the 5ya 

One thing immediately jumps out from the data.  Compare week 38 to week 53: 113.7% - 113.9%.  Where is the winter peak?  It's flat.  It went as low as 112.7% in week 44 before rising slowly to 113.9%.  

Now it seems to me that unless substantially fewer people die from week 21 (the peak) onwards then we were always going to finish the year on an excess number of deaths since those people that have already died cannot un-die.  Despite all the fear-mongering the % excess on the 5ya has been in decline since week 21 (24 May 20) and effectively nothing unusual has occurred death-wise since that spring peak.

 

The denominator increases with each week that passes. Therefore the number of deaths has been increasing at approx. 13.8% per week above the usual average to maintain that average. If the deaths in December had been average then the excess deaths percentage would have gradually decreased towards 10% above average for the year.

Obviously the definition of a covid death as being any within 28 days of a test is bollocks. As is the idea that all excess deaths this year are covid deaths when the lockdown response and related unavailability of healthcare has killed an unknown number. That the increase in deaths in recent weeks has stuck remarkably close to the usual annual distribution is not a smoking gun that there isn't a pandemic this winter.

Edited by Yadda yadda yadda
Link to post
Share on other sites
MrPin

I believe you only have to test positive, and then subsequently die of anything (unfortunate piano winching accident?) to get included in the covid numbers.

It's all bollocks now. How many still believe in a pandemic?

  • Agree 4
  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
the gardener
58 minutes ago, Yadda yadda yadda said:

The denominator increases with each week that passes. Therefore the number of deaths has been increasing at approx. 13.8% per week above the usual average to maintain that average. If the deaths in December had been average then the excess deaths percentage would have gradually decreased towards 10% above average for the year.

Obviously the definition of a covid death as being any within 28 days of a test is bollocks. As is the idea that all excess deaths this year are covid deaths when the lockdown response and related unavailability of healthcare has killed an unknown number. That the increase in deaths in recent weeks has stuck remarkably close to the usual annual distribution is not a smoking gun that there isn't a pandemic this winter.

Yes, true. 113% over 53 weeks would need more deaths to maintain that 13% lead from week 38. I've obviously had one too many G&Ts tonight, hic. 

However so many of those additional deaths must be due to lockdown - they're certainly non-covid anyway. Take those 36,000+ out and the end of year excess is no more than about half what they claim ~39,000 = about 6.4% excess deaths for the year. I doubt that would even be statistically significant. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
reformed nice guy

I posted this on another thread, but does it take into account:

  • the population is getting older
  • people are surviving more serious conditions so therefore have a worse relative health (more cancer survivors etc)
  • diet is getting worse
  • exercise levels down
  • less active jobs
  • population increase from third world bringing serious disease exposure (TB, malaria etc)
  • reduced sun exposure over summer compared to previous years for significant % of population
  • flu deaths are minimal
  • admissions for strokes, heart attacks etc are down (has lockdown reduced heart attacks more than statins?!)
  • population has increased an (estimated) average of 300k per year, so thats an extra 1.5m to compare to. What is the adjusted death rate?
  • how does it compare to 10 or 20 years ago? We have had a prolonged period of life expectancy increases but recently people have been getting fatter and lazier IMO

 

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
mosstrooper

"Now, if you total the deaths for 2020, week 1 to 53 you get 614,114.

The 5 year average for the each of those weeks 1-53 totals 539,083.

Therefore we have excess deaths above the 5 year average of 75,031.  This works out at 113.9% of the 5 year average.  Clearly then more people than normal died.  I haven't yet worked out if this is statistically significant but I suspect it is."

 

So if you approximate a normal curve to poisson , assume standard deviation is Sq root of mean, then 1SD value is about 70,000, so approx 85% prob less than 1sd upper, or only 15% prob greater than 70,000 extra deaths per annum (due to random chance variation about the mean). So not quite significant at the 90% level but close at 85%. So its borderline statistically significant. If it was 100k extra then yes its statistically significant at the 90% level ie theres less than 10% chance of it being that high due to random chance variation  from the mean)

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Wahoo

Deaths in care homes are estimated to be 15% above average.  

Someone I know is 90 and has covid...in fact everyone in the care home has tested positive.  This person is dying of old age....but will become a covid statistic.

Age related mortality shows an increase every year due to the boomers getting old.

The lockdown deaths are a scandal.  You can only hide the truth for so long.

 

  • Agree 3
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
spygirl
2 hours ago, Wahoo said:

Deaths in care homes are estimated to be 15% above average.  

Someone I know is 90 and has covid...in fact everyone in the care home has tested positive.  This person is dying of old age....but will become a covid statistic.

Age related mortality shows an increase every year due to the boomers getting old.

The lockdown deaths are a scandal.  You can only hide the truth for so long.

 

To celebrate the 100k passing the TV news had a 'people who've died'

Yes .. my father died from covid .... He picked it up at hospital oon a outpatient visit ....

Bad Boris.

Hysterical BS on the 100k deaths.

One, that people whove died with covid.

Two, the UK are testing peope more and just shoving covid on the cert.

Then theres this junk

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55820178

Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby and Archbishop of York Stephen Cottrell asked people, regardless of whether they had faith or not, to join in a "prayer for the nation" at 18:00 GMT every day from 1 February.

They said the death statistics were were not "just an abstract figure", saying: "Each number is a person: someone we loved and someone who loved us."

The letter also said poorer communities, minority ethnic communities and those with disabilities had been "disproportionately" affected by the pandemic and "cry out for the healing of these inequalities".

Absolute BS.

Show us the figures.

The people who are dying are the very old and the poorly and very obese.

The fact that BAME and poor falls across these points to them not being poor.

Radio got some drbblig lefty on going on health investment.

It was the NHS that killed most people FFS.

 

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
spygirl

Jesus.

The lefty goes - I would nto concentrate on obesity ..

What??????
Thats the fucking main thing with the younger deaths FFS.

Test and trace a disaster as it was put out to the private sector..

Should have been handed to the NHS + LA.

What????

Te NHS + LAs all fucked off on furlough.

They do not have any logitic or technical skill.

Heres the idiot

http://www.instituteofhealthequity.org/about-us/about-professor-sir-michael-marmot

What the fuck is Institute of Health Equity?

Commie Marxist BS:

http://www.instituteofhealthequity.org/about-us

 

 

 

 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
sarahbell
9 hours ago, stokiescum said:

You need a hobby sir.ps don’t say you have one working stastics out

There's a lad on twitter who does election stats. Some people like numbers to look pretty

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
sarahbell

What's the average age of the excess deaths. 

We should have a health score as you do a credit score.

Taking into account underlying conditions exercise diet weight smoking status etc 

 

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Wight Flight
3 hours ago, Wahoo said:

Deaths in care homes are estimated to be 15% above average.  

Someone I know is 90 and has covid...in fact everyone in the care home has tested positive.  This person is dying of old age....but will become a covid statistic.

Age related mortality shows an increase every year due to the boomers getting old.

The lockdown deaths are a scandal.  You can only hide the truth for so long.

 

There are 418,000 people in care homes.

In an average year, 100,000 of them die.

What a coincidence.

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
eight

So it was just flu all along then?

Hard to see how a truly novel coronavirus would only see off the old, unhealthy and fat.

Edited by eight
  • Agree 3
  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
MrPin
21 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

There are 418,000 people in care homes.

In an average year, 100,000 of them die.

What a coincidence.

Yes, you don't go into those places "temporarily" until you get better.

I also suspect we have a bulk of people of that age at the moment., and will have more as the post war births get to that age.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
spygirl
2 hours ago, Wight Flight said:

There are 418,000 people in care homes.

In an average year, 100,000 of them die.

What a coincidence.

Depends on the type.

Residential - ~20 months.

Nursing (high care) - 11 months.

Normally, youd expect more than 50% of people in both be be dead within 12 months

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Malthus
1 minute ago, spygirl said:

Depends on the type.

Residential - ~20 months.

Nursing (high care) - 11 months.

Normally, youd expect more than 50% of people in both be be dead within 12 months

 

The media reports interviewing care home workers and owners in March 2020 you would have thought no one had ever died in a care home before 

  • Agree 3
  • Lol 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
MrPin
Just now, Malthus said:

The media reports interviewing care home workers and owners in March 2020 you would have thought no one had ever died in a care home before 

It's why they are near a crematorium.:S

  • Lol 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
the gardener

 

This is ONS data giving the % change in mortality for each age group from 2007-17.

Puts the 'pandemic' in perspective doesn't it? 

 

 

Screenshot_20210127-113254.png

Edited by the gardener
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
maffo
10 hours ago, the gardener said:

 

This is ONS data giving the % change in mortality for each age group from 2007-17.

Puts the 'pandemic' in perspective doesn't it? 

 

 

 

I take it this means that as the population aged they enjoyed longer lifespans, over that 07-17 period, as a whole?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Masked Tulip
22 hours ago, MrPin said:

I believe you only have to test positive, and then subsequently die of anything (unfortunate piano winching accident?) to get included in the covid numbers.

It's all bollocks now. How many still believe in a pandemic?

 

472f994622754d9735f081074420573c.gif

  • Lol 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...