Life expectancy vs the 'virus'

[ajohn]

I do agree its time to get on with Covid. Lockdowns don't work. However, it seems we just need to buy a bit of time until February 2021

I'm surprised you and others aren't aware of what it's all about - lock downs etc. It's pretty simple really if the NHS gets too many to treat the numbers that would die are enormous. It wont be just the old either. One way of looking at it is anyone who needed to go to hospital. Find out how many and then compare with likely % of population actually infected.

Lock downs do work but can't last for ever. The other problem is the nature of the illness - no symptoms in some case and then comes idiots. Pure and simple people who have no idea what they are doing to the economy and everything else long term. Brainless farts in other words.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I have been thinking about this and I think I've got the flaw in the argument.

Imagine everyone over the age of 83 died all at once thanks to Covid-19, then drag in a handful of 30 somethings to bring the average down to 82.4. Voila, the same average age of death due to Covid-19 as the previous life expectancy. What would happen is that the average life expectancy would drop. (edit: slightly expanded)

It's the wrong way to use statistics.

No sh!t Sherlock.

The average age of old people is higher than the average age of everybody.

 

[^woody^]

I've asked this elsewhere, with no answer, so I'll try here. Who do we,or any other nation in debt, owe the "money" to ? Question open to all.

The countries and institutions who buy government gilts/bonds.

The countries and institutions who have provided loans.

 

[IT Minion]

No sh!t Sherlock.

The average age of old people is higher than the average age of everybody.

No Watson, you miss the point.

You've been regurgitating the average age of death as if it shows that Covid-19 is just being blamed for otherwise expected deaths. It doesn't prove that at all.

 

[EFLImpudence]

You've been regurgitating the average age of death as if it shows that Covid-19 is just being blamed for otherwise expected deaths. It doesn't prove that at all.

Have I?

 

[ellal]

I have been thinking about this and I think I've got the flaw in the argument.

Imagine everyone over the age of 83 died all at once thanks to Covid-19, then drag in a handful of 30 somethings to bring the average down to 82.4. Voila, the same average age of death due to Covid-19 as the previous life expectancy. What would happen is that the average life expectancy would drop. (edit: slightly expanded)

It's the wrong way to use statistics.

Life expectancy has until recently been rising mainly due to better medical care/advancements...

It had already started falling due to under investment because of 'austerity' caused by the tory reaction to the 2008/2009 'banking crisis'...

Most of the elderly who have died (because they apparently tested positive) would have died anyway, so we have to wait for the real excess death figures...

And the real figures are the ones of those who wouldn't have been expected to die 'because of the virus' - younger people!

But we are now apparently to go into another 'austerity period' (did it ever end?), and the government will be able to blame the 'virus' for their financially motivated 'cull'...

Whichever way you measure it, death is death!

 

[Vinty]

What about the other Billion ?

It is a work in progress.

 

[EddieM]

Is this life expectancy at birth? If so it's risen every year since at least the 1980's for both sexes.

 

[Trazor]

Life expectancy has until recently been rising mainly due to better medical care/advancements...

Correct

It had already started falling due to under investment because of 'austerity' caused by the tory reaction to the 2008/2009 'banking crisis'...

Nonsense, see your line above. Life expectancy has risen yearly, apart perhaps for this year

Most of the elderly who have died (because they apparently tested positive) would have died anyway.

Many would still be alive today, and valued family members.

so we have to wait for the real excess death figures...

They are already known, it's about 63.000 extra deaths over the norm.

And the real figures are the ones of those who wouldn't have been expected to die 'because of the virus' - younger people!

Youngsters yes, even more important that the virus isn't allowed to go rampant.

But we are now apparently to go into another 'austerity period' (did it ever end?), and the government will be able to blame the 'virus' for their financially motivated 'cull'...

So the government handed out multi billions of pounds to help, just so they could claw it back........

Whichever way you measure it, death is death!

Let us hope that you aren't quite so flippant, if someone you know catches it.

 

[EFLImpudence]

They are already known, it's about 63.000 extra deaths over the norm.

There is no 'norm'.

What they are comparing it with is (I keep hearing) the average of the last five years - when there was no particularly bad flu strain.

Perhaps it would be more honest to compare it with a bad flu year.

There are very few excess deaths at the moment so it must actually be better than the worst of the last five years - and as the excess death figure is higher than the covid death figure, even better than that as far as covid is concerned.

 

[Trazor]

There is no 'norm'.

Of course there is a "norm"

What they are comparing it with is (I keep hearing) the average of the last five years - when there was no particularly bad flu strain.

That would be the "norm"

Perhaps it would be more honest to compare it with a bad flu year.

Let's be even more honest and compare it to the years 1346 to 1353

There are very few excess deaths at the moment so it must actually be better than the worst of the last five years - and as the excess death figure is higher than the covid death figure, even better than that as far as covid is concerned.

There are fewer excess deaths just at the moment because of lockdowns/restrictions, these restrictions also reduce Flu deaths and other infectious/contagious diseases.
Excess deaths may rise though, due to other unintended consequences.

 

[IT Minion]

Perhaps it would be more honest to compare it with a bad flu year.

It has been done, the first wave was massively greater.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Clearly not:

50,000 excess deaths in 2018
80,000 excess deaths in 1969

 

[IT Minion]

Clearly not:

50,000 excess deaths in 2018
80,000 excess deaths in 1969

1969. Right.

For 2018 that's a full winter season where the flu vaccine didn't work and it was abnormally cold. Covid-19 only started half way through the season. The greatest daily discrepancy was around 300 in 2018.

Remind me what the greatest discrepancies were during the first wave of Covid-19?

I really don't understand the idiots who think that Covid-19 is just as bad as the flu. It takes incredible deliberate myopia to make that sort of mistake.

 

[EFLImpudence]

1969. Right.

Oh so one which was a lot worse does not count. Ok.

We lived through it and did not bugger the country (world) nor even notice it. No one told us.

For 2018 that's a full winter season where the flu vaccine didn't work and it was abnormally cold. Covid-19 only started half way through the season.

Oh ok, didn't know they were only counting warm Winters with vaccine.

The greatest daily discrepancy was around 300. Remind me what the greatest discrepancies were during the first wave of Covid-19?

Depends what you compare it with. How about a nice low average?