Forethat
-
Posts
3877 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Forethat
-
-
I think it's important to point out that there is no such thing as a manual. Personally, I think characters like Piers Morgan who's using the pandemic as a way to attack people and blame them for being "incompetent", acting as if they are trying to take advantage of the pandemic, should be shut down. Of course, there will be mistakes. Lots of them. The entire world is in uncharted territory here. He's not contributing ONE single bit to any type of solution. In this case, people are dying all over the place and he's upset no one knows the exact number?
Every country is struggling. The UK is doing plenty wrong. So are others. But, to behave like Piers Morgan and act as if there was a known solution and a "best practice" only proves he's nothing but a sensationalist <deleted>. If he knows the solution to this he should step up and be heard. Otherwise, I suggest he take a slightly more humble approach and simply shut his trap. But I guess it's easier to complain and act like a tosser while others attempt to solve the problem...
If Piers Morgan worked in a creative environment and behaved this way he'd be sacked faster than anyone on this forum can say "Tom Yum Gong". Actually, make that "Tom"...
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, rhyddid said:
BS BJ as a good clown is hiding real data, just compare di numbers at present time
1 - total tests 535,352
2 - total infected 129,044
3 - total deaths 17,337
show a 13.5% deaths on infected which is very high already, but the real scary data is on
average of tested vs infected a good 25% of infected vs tested this means in UK 25% of population is infected!
now compare the bad and unlucky Italy
183,000 infected vs 1,450,000 tested a much lower percentage , just 12% if infected
The joker, is achieving his goal "herd immunization" and ready to say goodbye to your dear one !
Thanking his voters and there will be always hope he will be sent to court and tried for manslaughter !
Ehh, no.
The number of tested people mostly represent the people that were hospitalised and therefore tested. There are obviously a small number of NHS staff tested, but expect that a vast majority of the 535,352 tests to have been performed on people who showed serious symptoms. No one knows the number of infected citizens. I wouldn't even speculate in this matter.
Germany performs wide-scale testing and in theory, should display a reasonably good picture of how widespread the epidemic is. They have an infection rate of 8%.
-
1
-
-
Financial Times published an article earlier this morning. It suggests that the COVID-19 death too is far higher than what is reported. Their figure is even higher than the ONS report published the other day. Clearly, there is need for drastic change in policies and procedures.
https://www.ft.com/content/67e6a4ee-3d05-43bc-ba03-e239799fa6ab
It appears what's happening is:
1. People in care homes aren't being tested (at some point they introduced a scheme where the first five suspected cases are being tested to identify an outbreak)
2. Death certificates sometimes mentions COVID-19 as the direct cause of death, sometimes as a condition leading to the direct cause of death. In 1% of the death certificates analysed by ONS, "suspected COVID-19" was mentioned as a condition contributing to death.
3. There is a significant lag between issuing the death certificate until the death certificate has been posted to be registered
4. There's an additional lag between the time the death certificate has been registered and the ONS report has been published after analysis
I mentioned in another thread that an even bigger concern is how many cases are there where there is NO mention of COVID-19 on the death certificate. If FT are to be believed I was spot on.
Either way, I think it's safe to say that no one knows the number of COVID-19 deaths in the UK.
-
8 minutes ago, rickudon said:
Why? I thought this is a common antibody, not specific to any disease.
Given the context of this discussion, do you think the Immunoglobulin G in question would be SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin G...?
In case you had doubts, let me assure you that it is.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, 7by7 said:
Incorrect.
Whilst not very much, certainly not enough, testing takes place, some does.
From the first link in my previous post:-
Until recently only the first few people with symptoms in each care home were tested to confirm the virus
The phrase 'until recently' surely means that it is safe to assume that more testing in care homes is now taking place: as it should.
Correct. What I meant is that NHS is the testing regime. It's their labs.
Though I seriously question the decision to "as laboratory capacity increases, all care home residents who develop symptoms will be tested." That's not good enough. They need to test ALL residents and ALL care home workers. IN particular, care home workers need to be tested for Immunoglobulin G.
-
- Popular Post
17 minutes ago, Sheryl said:Getting a handle on deaths outside of hospitals is a challenge everywhere. Especially in hard hit areas where normal procedures and investigations aren't always being followed by an overwhelmed health and emergency response system.
This is pretty much the case in the UK. Here, the procedure for registering the death accurately is damaged by a series of flaws.
First of all, no testing outside NHS hospitals takes place. Guidance is issued that allows the death certificate issuing doctor to identify the cause of death OR the condition leading to the direct cause of death as COVID-19. No one can validate the accuracy from a clinical perspective since clinical judgement is in effect. What is happening now is that statisticians are trying to identify a discrepancy in death rates against the established statistical norm.
In addition, the reporting of deaths from non-NHS hospitals (care homes, hospices and private homes) where deaths can be registered electronically directly to Public Health England, lags behind by an alleged 6 days. The latest ONS report which included analysis of death certificates lagged by 16 days. ONS have announced today that they will make the required changes to their processing in order to deliver the analysis in 11 days.
In my opinion, to even suggest that someone should be able to provide an accurate report on the daily fatalities under these conditions only proves that the challenge is not properly comprehended.
-
4
-
1
-
2
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
An even more bizarre fact is that a large number of China's liveliest startup biotech companies are partially funded by...american companies.
-
3
-
39 minutes ago, 7by7 said:
What I and others are saying is that right from the start the government should have made it clear that the figures were only for hospital deaths and the actual number would be significantly higher when all the deaths outside hospitals had been collected and included.
But they didn't.
Yes, as I and others said well before you, they are now so doing; but they only started to make this clear after being challenged on the accuracy of their figures.
They said exactly the same thing on April 6, that the patients accounted for were patients that were tested and brought to hospital. April 6 That's WELL before anyone challenged the accuracy of the reports (the accuracy wasn't questioned until ONS published the report on April 16).
Just to give you another example of the transparency of the apparent inaccuracy of the reports, this was pointed out in clear text during the Daily Briefing on April 8. Again, that is WELL before April 16 when ONS published the report you claim is the proof that they are deceiving the public. Here's a transcript of what was said:
Quote"So finally I have data on the sad statistic about of people who have died from COVID and this is an international comparison across different countries showing how that number accumulates in different countries, and the UK is the dark blue line somewhere in the middle there. This data has long reporting lags and even after the number of people in critical care stabilizes or even maybe begins to fall, this number will rise because sometimes deaths are reported many many days or even a week or so after sadly somebody has died, so expect this number to keep rising even after the curve has flattened."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000hlvk/bbc-news-special-coronavirus-daily-update-08042020
So, there is simply NOTHING that supports the idea that this is a deliberate deception. Contrary, there's an abundance of evidence to support the exact opposite.
-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:
So you think the UK government of Johnson is incompetent then.
I have no idea, and I don't think the qualities of BJ is the topic up for debate here.
To bring this back on topic, may I mention my previously provided information (supported by links to official documentation) regarding the reporting of deaths:
The deaths that occur in care homes and hospices are not included in the daily figures presented during the Daily Briefings because;
A. The deaths are not known at the time of the Daily Briefing (the briefing on April 20 made it clear that there is a 17 day lag for care home data). The ONS report subject to debate lags 16 days.
B. All care home deaths are not registered as deaths directly caused by COVID-19, or not registered as deaths where COVID-19 was a condition leading to the direct cause of deaths
C. The patients that died in care homes were not tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and are therefore not included in the data that is presented in the Daily Briefing where only patients with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection are included (testing only takes place at NHS hospitals)
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, 7by7 said:
And you have repeatedly defended the government disseminating innaccurate information.
As I said previously, we wouldn't be having this conversation if right from the start the government had said the figures were incomplete because they only included deaths in hospitals. But they didn't. They only finally admitted it when they were found out.
Well that's your conspiracy theory. I have provided facts that clearly show that they COULDN'T have known about the deaths in care homes.
Lastly, during the Daily Briefings it is CLEARLY stated that the numbers involves the people taken to HOSPITAL and how many have died in HOSPITAL. That's what they say. Here's a transcript from the briefing 14 April.
Quote"I can report that through the government ongoing monitoring and testing program as of today 302599 people in the UK have now been tested for coronavirus with 93873 people testing positive 19706 people in the UK have been admitted to hospital with the virus down from 20184 people yesterday. Sadly of those in hospital, 12107 people have died, an increase of 778 fatalities since yesterday. Our thoughts are with the family and friends of all those who have lost their lives"
And as usual, I am the one providing the links, whilst you provide...nothing.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000hqdd/bbc-news-special-coronavirus-daily-update-14042020
-
1
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, 7by7 said:
In fact, every single point of yours which I have been able to extract from the waffle has already been answered by myself and/or others at least once, often more.
Been answered by YOU? I thought this thing was covered by the official documentation I have provided links to?
Here they are, once again:
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, stevenl said:
So please show posts where you did not defend the accuracy of the reports.
I have never claimed the reports to be accurate. Contrary, I have several times pointed out their inaccuracy. That's my whole point, they ARE inaccurate. And I have explained WHY they are inaccurate.
-
2
-
-
18 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:
Its not a conspiracy theory to point out the government is lying.
It is if you can't provide an ounce of proof to support your accusations other than theories that the government is lying and that there is an underlying reason for it. That's what makes it a....conspiracy theory. I've pointed out the facts, and your response was to call me shameful? Really?
6 hours ago, Rookiescot said:How come other countries around the world (including Scotland and Wales) are able to include the number of deaths at care homes and elsewhere?
What is unique about England that it is not able to provide those figures?
We can all see why they are not included. And for some people on here to defend and obfuscate the reasons why is truly shameful.
18 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:The Scottish government knows how many have died in Scottish carehomes.
Apparently they do.
18 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:You are saying Westminster does not know. Now either this is due to incompetence or they are lying.
Which one do you think is most likely?
They don't know for reasons I have accounted for in this thread. Countless times. Incorrect procedures that weren't designed to support emergency response/efforts required to tackle a virus pandemic?
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, stevenl said:
Yes, you're saying that now after on a continuous basis defending the government reporting.
So please show posts where you did not defend the accuracy of the reports.
I am not defending it, I'm simply giving you a technical and factual explanation as to WHY the reporting is incorrect.
-
2
-
-
45 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:
The difficulty the Government now has is coming up with a credible excuse for misreporting the deaths of people outside of Hospitals.
Well, the excuse is that the Government only reports on deaths that are confirmed to be SARS-CoV-2 positive, and for that they have to be tested, which doesn't happen in care homes and hospices.
As I have pointed out - countless times, it seems - very few doctors will put COVID-19 as the direct cause of death or a condition leading to the direct cause of death unless there is a confirmed test. 1% of them put "suspected COVID-19". It takes at least six days for this information to be recorded, and in the case of ONS it took a total of 16 days to analyse and publish the report. Now, how would this information be available to the Government on a daily basis when it wasn't even recorded until six days later?
I think journalists have a valid point when they ask how many people have died from COVID-19, but the simple answer probably is that they don't know. And I also believe we should ask ourselves how many have died in care homes and hospitals where there is NO mentioning of COVID-19 on the death certificate.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, BobBKK said:
Unless you are an Epidemiologist maybe listen to one? death rate well below 1%
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/04/18/swedish_epidemiologist_johan_giesecke_why_lockdowns_are_the_wrong_policy.html?fbclid=IwAR3HQKiUgEJLqsA45dZ03Tp3xwTngFMJ7InMySfc8SROmPaaRr_rxS2T5zYThat guy is not the most diplomatic guy, to say the very least... good grief!
Keep in mind that the 0.1% CFR is a speculation. It's not supported by facts, but by applying epidemical knowledge to a subset of data. But everyone is entitled to an opinion. My guess (speculation based on statistics) is that the CFR will land in the 0.8%-1.2% range.
-
2
-
-
I have to admit I get confused when I debate someone who clearly doesn't read my posts.
29 minutes ago, Forethat said:And just to point out (once again) I don't support or defend either side, I'm simply pointing out the facts.
18 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:Can you provide an example of you supporting both sides?
If you want to I can repeat myself:
I don't support or defend either side, I'm simply pointing out the facts.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, 7by7 said:
My personal opinion is that they are still feebly trying to somehow make excuses for their ineptitude at the start of the crisis and since.
Yea, we get that much. And that's ok. And as I previously pointed out, if you or anyone else wants to come up with conspiracy theories (even the ones involving alien insemination) you're free to do so. I couldn't care less. But if you ask me why there is a discrepancy between the ONS analysis in question and the government reports I've given you an explanation that focus on the technical and factual reasons to exactly why there is a difference.
14 hours ago, 7by7 said:You're the one who claims access to inside knowledge, not I.
You claim that I have written something, and when you're asked to show WHERE you come up with some twaddle? One more thing, the post you have quoted is taken out of its original context. You're breaching the forum rules. I won't report your post, but in the future, I want to ask you kindly to stop pulling similar stunts.
I was accused by another poster of not knowing about the publicly available Guidance for doctors completing Medical Certificates of Cause of Death until he posted the BMA guidance (which referred to the NHS guidance which in turn referred to the real guidance). I work for the organisation that publishes the document, and early in this thread I posted information contained within that very document. Why would I not know about it? And at which point did I claim to "have inside knowledge". This is public information that ANYONE who is interested in has access to. I think there's a better word to describe the "inside knowledge" you refer to, namely 'well informed'. In YOUR case, as well as @Chomper Higgot's, I'd say 'uninformed'. Google if you don't want to listen. ANYONE who's interested and literate can find the information and figure this out in less than 10 minutes.
Lastly, I want to ask you kindly to stay on topic. Try to debate facts and opinions in an objective way and stop trying to deflect by creating discussions that focus on individual posters. I don't think anyone is interested in that.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, 7by7 said:
Really?
A trawl through your posts in this topic and your use of, for example, 'tin foil hat wearing' and 'gibberish' when addressing and referring to posters who question and criticise the government strongly indicates otherwise!
I don't use the term Tin Foil Hat other than when people come up with conspiracy theories. In this case there are a couple of posters who've come up with....conspiracy theories.
Do you want to refer to them as fact-based analysts?
https://www.dictionary.com/e/pop-culture/tinfoil-hat/
And just to point out (once again) I don't support or defend either side, I'm simply pointing out the facts. Nothing else. And in this case the fact is that the Government couldn't report the deaths in question simply because they didn't know about them. Simple as that. There's goes the conspiracy in the bin...
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, 7by7 said:
The press already know and have reported the discrepancy and taken the government to task over it. As shown in the OP.
Which, as said before, is why the government changed their daily briefings to say that their figures are just for hospital deaths.
If they'd been honest about this from the start we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Well, then we simply have to disagree. Personally, I find it perfectly reasonable that the Government only report on data they KNOW about at the time. I also find it impossible that they lied about data they didn't know about. The Daily Briefing death count only includes the deaths where the patient have tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, and for good reasons since it is the only source of accurate data. As much as you want it, there is no psychic interface between a care home patient and the person recording the deaths that automagically enters the fatality with COVID-19 as the direct cause of death.
I have yet to hear someone suggest that there wasn't a discrepancy between the ONS analysis and the daily briefings.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:
It is all over the news. The government just keep avoiding the questions.
I think we interpret the media's questions completely differently.
Nowhere in the clip above is it suggested that anyone is deliberately lying or 'hiding' information. Nowhere. The question raised is "how many have died in care homes?" They don't know for exactly the reasons I have accounted for. I think the question is perfectly valid, though. But they're not hiding anything. They don't know. Simple as that. That's why Piers is giving her a grilling. A follow-up question from me would be: why aren't you ramping up the testing to include patients in care homes and why aren't you making changes to guidance and reporting so that you can get an accurate picture of the extent of the epidemic without having to wait up to three weeks for an ONS analysis?
And please stop behaving as if I support or defend either side of this debate. Whether I believe the numbers to be incorrect or think the reporting should and could be improved is irrelevant. I have provided explanation that shows WHY the ONS figures are different compared to the Government. Nothing else.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Rookiescot said:
So how are other countries within the UK able to?
You know why the figures are not being included. Its to keep the numbers down.
So every day the UK government essentially lies to the public.
Making excuses for the government lying to the people during a crisis is the actions of a third world country.
1. I don't know
2. Yes, I know why the numbers are not included. I have explained that in excess. Again.
3. Do they? You need to call the press since it'd be all over the news if you have proof.
4.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Rookiescot said:
How come other countries around the world (including Scotland and Wales) are able to include the number of deaths at care homes and elsewhere?
What is unique about England that it is not able to provide those figures?
We can all see why they are not included. And for some people on here to defend and obfuscate the reasons why is truly shameful.
I have no idea - and no interest in debating that question - why other countries are able to include deaths in care homes. I guess they are better at reporting these matters.
I don't know what is unique about England in that aspect.
They are not included in the daily figures because;
A. The deaths are not known at the time of the Daily Briefing (todays briefing made it clear that there is a 17 day lag for care home data). The ONS report subject to debate lags 16 days.
B. All care home deaths are not registered as deaths directly caused by COVID-19 or not registered as deaths where COVID-19 was a condition leading to the direct cause of deaths
C. The patients that died in care homes were not tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and are therefore not included in the data that is presented in the Daily Briefing
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, adammike said:
A journalist on the Downing Street daily press conference asked a question,he said that people who work in health care claim that the real death figures could be up to 40% higher than the daily total that only showed hospital and people who have tested positive.
It was ITV-journalist Robert Peston who asked the following question (unofficial transcript):
QuoteUhm, good afternoon to you, uhm, the ONS seem to indicate today with its data, that your deaths in hospitals are under reporting the total, the totality of deaths from covid-19, by as much as 40%. Do you think that IS right, do you think that we will, when we get to it, to the end of this, see the death rate roughly, you know, 40% odd higher than the numbers you’ve reported so far from hospitals.
I think the question is relevant. But at this point no one knows the answer. The answer that was given by Yvonne Doyle, Medical Director of Public Health, England, was (unofficial transcript):
QuoteSo Robert, yes, it, undoubtedly the hospital data do not tell the whole story of total deaths, and, ehh, this week as for last week we will have a comprehensive view of that later in the week from ONS, ehm..I don’t know whether 40% is a correct figure I couldn’t really say that but I would expect more and we know now from looking at the pattern that nine out of 10 deaths do occur in hospital but I do, ehh...feel is that the burden of mortality outside of hospital isn't evenly distributed throughout the country it will mirror where for instance there may be more care homes or more hospices so we’ll see, ehh, an uneven pattern of that, ehh, but will certainly know for sure later this week what the comprehensive number is.
I think it's worth pointing out that had he suggested that the Government cooked the books by deliberately hiding the number of fatalities he more than likely would have been laughed at and sacked for being inept.
-
1
-
COVID-19 death toll in England 41% higher than early data suggested: ONS
in World News
Posted
I decided to omit the fact there is currently an unknown number of care home residents who COUNTS as tested in care homes while they are in fact tested at an NHS hospital after being admitted to hospital with severe symptoms.
There's another statistical conundrum for you right there: a care home resident, being brought to hospital and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, eventually dies. Is this patient counted as a fatality reported in a Daily Briefing? Most likely. Is the patient counted again as a care home resident who died in from COVID-19? Possibly. And an even more important question: Does anyone know the exact details of the fatalities? Evidently not.