Can the Covid Prophets twist these numbers please?

[IT Minion]

The higher death rate in the 90s to early 2000s was the massive increase of people born after the first world war, and the increase in deaths now is because of a big increase of people born after WW2 and it will continue for a few more years.
But the fact still remains Covid is killing people.

The Age adjusted mortality takes that into account. It's more that NHS funding and outcomes were poor. https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/news-item/70-years-of-nhs-spending#then-and-now

The labour Government put a lot more money and that started to show results.

 

[Brigade77]

The way it has been explained to me by a sensible, educated, informed & mentally well balanced anti-vaxxer . . . .

The death rate is 100%, always has been & always will be. Along comes a virus with a high rate of fatality, the only way it would affect the average statistics that make up the 100% death rate is if a vastly disproportionate amount of a certain age group were to suffer.

i.e. Imagine the average death rate of 20-25yr olds was 10%. Along comes a virus that only kills 20-25 yr olds & that average death rate will move upwards, lets say to 35%. The death rate during the virus won't move up to 135% or even 125%.

Does anyone have the knowledge of how to use statistics to calculate that example???

The problem with the Covid19 virus is the highest number of fatalities is in the 75+ age group. As this age group has a much higher yearly average of deaths of all the age groups then a virus killing them off isn't going to show in the statistics.

Other viri have a much greater spread of the age groups they affect & a virus (like Ebola) can therefore be easily shown to statistically raise the average yearly death rate.

Covid19 isn't VirusX, it isn't Ebola & it isn't Spanish Flu. Statistically it isn't even a bad flu & I still don't know anyone who's died because of it. Which I find strange at my time of life where my main group of friends & relatives are well within the age groups that suffer high yearly rates of deaths . . . . !

There are lies, damn lies & then there are statistics. The only fact that I trust is 72.8% of all statistics are made up, generated & interpreted to suit an agenda.

 

[IT Minion]

The problem with the Covid19 virus is the highest number of fatalities is in the 75+ age group. As this age group has a much higher yearly average of deaths of all the age groups then a virus killing them off isn't going to show in the statistics

Covid19 isn't VirusX, it isn't Ebola & it isn't Spanish Flu. Statistically it isn't even a bad flu

It did show in the statistics and it's something like 10 times more deadly than the flu.

 

[Brigade77]

It did show in the statistics and it's something like 10 times more deadly than the flu.

For WHO?

Every time I look at a respected source of the figures, that haven't been twisted by the soundbites of the MSM, they're showing it is only really affecting the death rate in the elderly & infirm. Much like the flu does almost every season.

I did a lot of reading up on Spanish Flu when I did the family tree, it's quite clear in anyone's family tree the affect Spanish Flu had on the whole population. At the beginning of all this nonsense I really did fear we were facing a major emergency that would visit ALL families.

I still don't know anyone who has died of Covid19.

 

[johnny2007]

Why did it change so much from 2003 to 2004….until you can explain that your argument is mute

my guess is methodology was changed

Those are official numbers.
Nothing to explain.
You've asked for numbers, now you have them.
Do you dispute these official figures?

 

[johnny2007]

Nope. Because when lockdowns were in place and Covid rates were low, the death rate was below previous years. Your logic is crap.

When lockdown was in place, covid rates were low???
So they were lying to us.
They kept on saying that whilst you were locked in your toilet, piles of bodies were being moved by diggers on the street.
Now you're saying that during lockdown covid was under control???

 

[ellal]

Why did it change so much from 2003 to 2004….until you can explain that your argument is mute

my guess is methodology was changed

Maybe because the 'methodology' has changed so that now dying with covid is counted the same as dying of covid by the ONS?

I wonder what previous figures would be if dying with flu was counted the same as dying of flu?

 

[AngleEyes]

When lockdown was in place, covid rates were low???

Were they? So why the need for lockdown? Perhaps Notch7 meant 'lower' than if there was no lockdown, i.e relatively low.

They kept on saying that whilst you were locked in your toilet, piles of bodies were being moved by diggers on the street.

Did they? Which country are you in?

Now you're saying that during lockdown covid was under control???

So why the need for lockdown?
Low rates does not equate to 'under control'.

 

[IT Minion]

When lockdown was in place, covid rates were low???
So they were lying to us.
They kept on saying that whilst you were locked in your toilet, piles of bodies were being moved by diggers on the street.
Now you're saying that during lockdown covid was under control???

and Covid rates were low, you jibbering idiot. That happened near the end of each lockdown before it was relaxed/ended.

 

[johnny2007]

Were they? So why the need for lockdown? Perhaps Notch7 meant 'lower' than if there was no lockdown, i.e relatively low.


Did they? Which country are you in?

So why the need for lockdown?
Low rates does not equate to 'under control'.

You're asking questions to the wrong person.

 

[johnny2007]

and Covid rates were low, you jibbering idiot. That happened near the end of each lockdown before it was relaxed/ended.

So your 3 neurons are now disputing official figures or are they just trying to steer away from the main subject?

 

[IT Minion]

So your 3 neurons are now disputing official figures or are they just trying to steer away from the main subject?

Where on earth did you get that?

And I'm still on topic, you thought that death rates were higher due to lack of normal care due to lockdown. You can tell you're wrong in two ways, first by checking your username, still johnny2007 so almost certainly wrong. Secondly by looking at the mortality rate month by month for 2020 and seeing that it dropped below average around the end of the first lockdown.

 

[denso13]

because all screening stopped, all diagnostics were suspended, all operations were cancelled, all treatments substituted by "home care" and unless you had covid you wouldn't be allowed in any hospital?

Why did that happen if it wasn't actually required?

 

[JP_]

I've got bored of discussing covid. But there seems to be two types of covid expert left here:

1. Covid isn't real, nobody died really, it's all a hoax.
2. Covid is going to kill the world!!!

Maybe time to accept that the truth is somewhere inbetween.

Over 5 million people have died. More are going to die, because many people in other countries still don't have vaccines.

Little else to say now.

 

[ellal]

I've got bored of discussing covid. But there seems to be two types of covid expert left here:

1. Covid isn't real, nobody died really, it's all a hoax.
2. Covid is going to kill the world!!!

Maybe time to accept that the truth is somewhere inbetween.

In between is indeed the third option...

The 'virus' exists...

But is it as virulent as we are led to believe?

According to an anti-body test I've had it, but never noticed any symptoms...

As do 99% of people who contract it!