covid death figures

[mutantpoodle]

here in UK we include in total death figures anyone and everyone who has had a positive test within previous 28 days.HOWEVER they died..hence a large figure

do any other countries include those types in their total daeth figures\/

am interested because we continually being told how bad we are to others but our figures are not really accurate
(sad of course for those affected, but hardly real !!)

[pje16]

Not sure if all countries measue the same way but this site is what I use
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries
The uk figures are normally updated daily between 5and 6pm

[swill453]

here in UK we include in total death figures anyone and everyone who has had a positive test within previous 28 days.HOWEVER they died..hence a large figure

It's actually 28 days from their first positive test. So doesn't include people who die more than 28 days later.

So whether the number is larger or smaller than those actually "killed by Covid-19" is debatable (and has been debated, endlessly).

It's a goodish quick-and-dirty estimate though.

Scott.

[Mike4]

here in UK we include in total death figures anyone and everyone who has had a positive test within previous 28 days.HOWEVER they died..hence a large figure

On the other hand with improving medical treatments a lot of Covid deaths occur more than 28 days from the first positive test, hence a smaller figure is being reported than actually died of it.

This govt web page suggests the 28 day stat only captures 88% of Covid deaths. It also suggests 'only' 96% of Covid deaths occur within 60 days of the first +ve Covid test.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new- ... -19-deaths


(Edit to correct a minor detail)

[Breelander]

here in UK we include in total death figures anyone and everyone who has had a positive test within previous 28 days.HOWEVER they died..hence a large figure

do any other countries include those types in their total daeth figures\/

am interested because we continually being told how bad we are to others but our figures are not really accurate
(sad of course for those affected, but hardly real !!)

It used to be 60 days in England, but that was change to 28 days to bring England in line with the rest of the UK. I understand 28 days is also the measure used in the EU.

Prof Keith Neal, emeritus professor of the epidemiology of infectious diseases, from the University of Nottingham, said the two new measures were "sensible".

"The 28 days is widely used in many countries and England is now the same as the rest of the UK," he said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53722711

[9873210]

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths shows both "deaths within 28 days of first positive test" and "deaths with covid mentioned on the death certificate". For what it's worth the death certificate number is about 25,000 higher (about 20%).

There may be several reasons for this. Early in the pandemic there may have been a shortage of tests, so some deaths were not tested.

The numbers are also consistent with there being a number of deaths outside the 28 day window. In particular the excess of "death certificate" deaths is more noticeable in periods when the total number of cases is low (e.g. now and in August and September of 2020) this is consistent with these deaths being the result of infections that occurred in the preceding wave. Of course it's also consistent with less rigorous filling of death certificates during the peaks, when the NHS was overloaded.

Note that there are several different uses for the numbers. Wanting extreme accuracy for historical purposes may interfere with some of the other needs. The 28 day number is probably a better guide for setting immediate policy such as lockdowns or unlocking. By the time policy is being set delayed deaths are already baked in and won't respond to any recent or future changes in policy.

[UncleEbenezer]

"More or Less" - one of the Beeb's most credible programmes - did some relevant estimates, specifically about care homes.

They considered ONS statistics for the first wave (up to September 2020) and for the second wave thereafter. ONS stats for the first wave were 21k deaths, but the More or Less estimate was 27k, based on excess deaths as a best-available estimate, with the discrepancy explained by scarcity of testing. The second wave - with abundant testing - they believe the ONS figure was accurate (to within statistical expectations).

Similar considerations might apply in the general population, but that wasn't their subject on this occasion.

[mutantpoodle]

qq
than actually died of it
uqq

but this is really my point of asking!

we include everyone who dies...from ANY cause, that had tested positive within the 28 days prior to death

most, most definitely did not die OF it
albeit that perhaps /probably their systems were weakened by it

and out of interest why did England change to get in line with rest of UK...England has 80% of the population, minority groups surely should align with England??..........however useless our decision makers are?

[servodude]

qq
than actually died of it
uqq

but this is really my point of asking!

we include everyone who dies...from ANY cause, that had tested positive within the 28 days prior to death

most, most definitely did not die OF it
albeit that perhaps /probably their systems were weakened by it

Sure sure people were put in to comas and ventilated because they were false positives; there was never anything to see here

hospitals were full because of simultaneously arising unrelated stuff that just looked like a respiratory delivered disease that screws with your blood

- go tell them the truth! make sure everyone knows


might have another smoked porter first though
- or go by the death certificate figures instead.... ??


-sd

[Mike4]

most, most definitely did not die OF it
albeit that perhaps /probably their systems were weakened by it

What leads you to that conclusion? How come "definitely"?

Strikes me that you have decided for yourself in advance what you want to have happened, and now you are thrashing around looking for statistics to support your front end conclusion. But can't find any so you are questioning the validity of the stats instead.

[csearle]

With the proviso that I actually know little of the subject matter I would say that whether someone dies of CoViD rather than with CoViD is a judgement call best left to people that decide these sorts of things on a day-to-day basis.

It seems entirely reasonable to me to try to unify this call as much as possible across the world so that the statistics are more easily comparable. So if this body of expertise reckons "within 28 days of testing positive" is as fair a measure as any then I would be arrogant in the extreme were I to think I knew better. (At the very least I would have to propose a better scheme.)

Chris

[mutantpoodle]

qq
and now you are thrashing around looking for statistics to support your front end conclusion.
uqq

hardly 'thrashing about'.....merely questioning. the staistics used by governm.ent/scientists

re...'most definitely did not'...agree should not have said 'most'....but should have said 'not all'