FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Weekly All Causes Deaths In England And Wales

Weekly All Causes Deaths In England And Wales

Jump to: Newest in thread

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Source: Office For National Statistics

3 January

Week 1_______12,254

5-year avg_____12,175

Above avg by______79

CV-19 included______0

10 January

Week 2_______14,058

5-year avg_____13,822

Above avg by_____236

CV-19 included______0

17 January

Week 3_______12,990

5-year avg_____13,216

Below avg by_____226

CV-19 included______0

24 January

Week 4_______11,856

5-year avg_____12,760

Below avg by_____904

CV-19 included______0

31 January

Week 5_______11,612

5-year avg_____12,206

Below avg by_____594

CV-19 included______0

7 February

Week 6_______10,986

5-year avg_____11,925

Below avg by_____939

CV-19 included______0

14 February

Week 7_______10,944

5-year avg_____11,627

Below avg by_____683

CV-19 included______0

21 February

Week 8_______10,841

5-year avg_____11,548

Below avg by_____707

CV-19 included______0

28 February

Week 9_______10,816

5-year avg_____11,183

Below avg by_____367

CV-19 included______0

6 March

Week 10______10,895

5-year avg_____11,498

Below avg by_____603

CV-19 included______0

13 March

Week 11______11,019

5-year avg_____11,205

Below avg by_____186

CV-19 included______5

20 March

Week 12______10,645

5-year avg_____10,573

Above avg by______72

CV-19 included____103

27 March

Week 13______11,141

5-year avg_____10,130

Above avg by____1,011

CV-19 included____539

3 April

Week 14______16,387

5-year avg_____10,305

Above avg by____1,011

CV-19 included__3,475

At this time of the year, we should expect about 1,400 deaths each day from all causes, on average

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ax777Man over a year ago

Not here

"Source: Office For National Statistics

3 January

Week 1_______12,254

5-year avg_____12,175

Above avg by______79

CV-19 included______0

10 January

Week 2_______14,058

5-year avg_____13,822

Above avg by_____236

CV-19 included______0

17 January

Week 3_______12,990

5-year avg_____13,216

Below avg by_____226

CV-19 included______0

24 January

Week 4_______11,856

5-year avg_____12,760

Below avg by_____904

CV-19 included______0

31 January

Week 5_______11,612

5-year avg_____12,206

Below avg by_____594

CV-19 included______0

7 February

Week 6_______10,986

5-year avg_____11,925

Below avg by_____939

CV-19 included______0

14 February

Week 7_______10,944

5-year avg_____11,627

Below avg by_____683

CV-19 included______0

21 February

Week 8_______10,841

5-year avg_____11,548

Below avg by_____707

CV-19 included______0

28 February

Week 9_______10,816

5-year avg_____11,183

Below avg by_____367

CV-19 included______0

6 March

Week 10______10,895

5-year avg_____11,498

Below avg by_____603

CV-19 included______0

13 March

Week 11______11,019

5-year avg_____11,205

Below avg by_____186

CV-19 included______5

20 March

Week 12______10,645

5-year avg_____10,573

Above avg by______72

CV-19 included____103

27 March

Week 13______11,141

5-year avg_____10,130

Above avg by____1,011

CV-19 included____539

3 April

Week 14______16,387

5-year avg_____10,305

Above avg by____1,011

CV-19 included__3,475

At this time of the year, we should expect about 1,400 deaths each day from all causes, on average

I think you have a typo in the above average figure for week 14. It should read 6082 not 1012

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I dont knowing you just like stats or your a undertaker

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ophieslutTV/TS over a year ago

Central

Whatever the mean average stats, avoidable deaths from this virus should be being prevented. Test widely, contact tracing and treat and isolate those with issues.

There's no consolation if your death may fall within typical number ranges, if you would otherwise continue to have a fuller life.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

"average figure for week 14. It should read 6082 not 1012"

Whoops!

Must take more water with it!

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *uttyjonnMan over a year ago

SEA

In today's briefing they mentioned this week's upsurge of 6k could relate to people being too scared/concerned to go to hospital with their illnesses or surgical procedures being cancelled due to C19.

3500 deaths from this week's 16000 mentioned C19 on the death certificate

Which is a very sad scenario

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

For week 14 (ended 3rd April this year), the five-year average of deaths from influenza and pneumonia was 2,064 people. All that the politicians do about this carnage is offer free vaccinations that may work in one year out of every three.

We’re never going to know how many people the virus kills because of varying descriptions of the causes of deaths, and reporting delays.

The Office For National Statistics has been publishing the weekly death stats. for years, and I reckon their totals will be amongst the most reliable numbers available to justify putting the country into the worst depression since the 1930s.

We hadn’t fully recovered from the 2008 crash when this happened. Will we EVER recover from this one? Just how huge will the national debt have to be?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

More you test the variance in results.

Stats n data is open to critical analysis.

Not all covid deaths have been covid on death certif.

Covid has been secondary on some and ONS only use primary cause. Those in community not been recorded in ONS.

Shame its not focusing on recovery

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

The Office For National Statistics’ numbers prior to the 13th March show that weekly deaths were below the five-year averages, presumably because this winter’s flu vaccine actually worked. To follow this trend, the figure for the 13th March should have been about 500 below average, but was actually only 186. So there were probably around 300 additional death, probably again, caused directly or indirectly by the virus. But only 5 were recorded.

The Office For National Statistics’ numbers are “all causes” deaths and include deaths “from” the virus, deaths “with” the virus, and premature deaths from other causes due to the diversion of treatment to virus victims. The media are, as usual, not telling us what’s really going on, i.e. the daily deaths in excess of what would normally be expected at this time of the year – deaths in excess of about 1,400. The politicians have failed to make these numbers available.

The recovery “trajectory” is fairly easy to forecast with reasonable accuracy using data from previous pandemics, and recent data from this one. The politicians have the numbers. They are aware of the week when the virus death toll will start to decrease, and the week when the rate of new infections will become manageable. But we’re not allowed to know.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eat meetMan over a year ago

waterlooville

The major problem as I can see it is nobodys getting tested for antibodies to see who’s had it and that’s the key factor in this. I know at least 4 people plus myself that have been through it and recovered, how many people have had it with mild and no symptoms, it could possibly be in the millions which would bring the mortality figures more in line with other virus’s. Those huge spikes we are seeing are for figures of people that unfortunately are seriously ill, going to hospital and getting tested and then go on to die, these figures are seriously disproportionate to the true ratios. Fingers crossed it’s already run rampant through the country and gone through millions of people already without too much suffering and the “herd immunity” is kicking in. When we all start getting tested for antibodies we will understand what’s going on here and we’ll see the true ratio, we may find that this isn’t the zombie apocalypse and that there’s a light at the end of the tunnel sooner than we think. We desperately need to be tested for antibodies so we can get the country back up and running.

Respect to the NHS and frontliners and Reflect to the people who are suffering and passed away

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

The cost of testing over 60 million people would ruin the National Sick Service, and probably, the country too. I don’t think it has been attempted anywhere in the world. The comparative mortality rates are probably the best that we can hope for. The next O.F.N.S. report is due on the 21st.

Has anyone seen any stats. about the infected cruise liners? They must surely exist, and will show the proportions of total “total immunes” to “impaired immunes” to “susceptibles”. Those ships were perfect laboratory test vessels, with urban-style close social interactions in totally isolated environments. All of the passengers must have been exposed to the virus.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No one knows how many have had it and whos a carrier but doesnt show symptoms

Think its pointless to test to see if they have it because they could be clear and get it in a couple days

The test needs to be to show if you have had it

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

There are two tests.

One is for the virus, which shows people who are infected, and are infectious.

The other is for anti-bodies, which shows people who have been infected and maybe recovered. We’ve not been told if they are still infectious, but I’ve seen reports saying not by droplet, but maybe by faecal transfer.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

"There are two tests.

One is for the virus, which shows people who are infected, and are infectious.

There's only one test, the one that tells you if you have it

Nobody even knows if we can or will develop Anti Bodies

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

See Wikipedia, Covid-19 testing:-

“Covid-19 testing can identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus and includes methods that detect the presence of virus itself (RT-PCR and isothermal nucleic acid amplification) and those that detect antibodies produced in response to infection. Detection of antibodies (serology) can be used both for diagnosis and population surveillance.”

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

That's the theory ok, but there are no anti body tests that work, so there are no anti body tests.

Of course there's the possibility we don't develop Anti Bodies so there's nothing to detect.

Yet

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *adyinred696969Couple over a year ago

Brecon

"That's the theory ok, but there are no anti body tests that work, so there are no anti body tests.

Of course there's the possibility we don't develop Anti Bodies so there's nothing to detect.

Yet"

There is a theory that blood plasma from those that have survived C19 can be used to help those currently affected. There are antibodies in the plasma, and injecting it into C19 patients is thought to help their bodies rapidly produce more antibodies which is supposed to halp fight the virus much better, with a much higher survival rate. So far they have only just started to try this, fingers crossed it works.

It proves that the body produces antibodies.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

"That's the theory ok, but there are no anti body tests that work, so there are no anti body tests.

Of course there's the possibility we don't develop Anti Bodies so there's nothing to detect.

Yet

It proves that the body produces antibodies."

You should speak to the government then, because if you know where to get an anti body test that works then tell them

I worked in anti body testing for 20 years and many of my friends still do.

I've also got many Facebook friends working in every country in the world trying to develop one

I'm not saying never but at this moment in time the isn't an anti body test not even one that is remotely useable. The last trials I'm aware of was less than 30% accurate.

Even the test being used for nhs staff to detect the presence of the virus is only around 60% accurate

Wikipedia isnt always right you know

But I do agree the only way this will end is if we can successfully develop Anti Bodies, but that's unlikely to happen by taking anti bodies from one person to give to another

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

"That's the theory ok, but there are no anti body tests that work, so there are no anti body tests.

Of course there's the possibility we don't develop Anti Bodies so there's nothing to detect.

Yet"

No. That is the fact OK.

There is no possibility that “we don't develop Anti Bodies”, because that’s how all mammalian life responds to all viral infections.

And always has done.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

"That's the theory ok, but there are no anti body tests that work, so there are no anti body tests.

Of course there's the possibility we don't develop Anti Bodies so there's nothing to detect.

Yet

No. That is the fact OK.

There is no possibility that “we don't develop Anti Bodies”, because that’s how all mammalian life responds to all viral infections.

And always has done.

That's how it always has done is perfectly correct

The future doesn't come with guarantees

Anyways we digress

Currently there is no anti body test that works

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *adyinred696969Couple over a year ago

Brecon

"That's the theory ok, but there are no anti body tests that work, so there are no anti body tests.

Of course there's the possibility we don't develop Anti Bodies so there's nothing to detect.

Yet

No. That is the fact OK.

There is no possibility that “we don't develop Anti Bodies”, because that’s how all mammalian life responds to all viral infections.

And always has done.

That's how it always has done is perfectly correct

The future doesn't come with guarantees

Anyways we digress

Currently there is no anti body test that works"

You stated that it wasnt known if the human body produced antibodies against C19, the said you worked in something to do with antibodies, so I'm guessing you should know your stuff...my info doesnt come from wiki, it comes from the news on tv where they interviewed one of the medical staff carrying out the trial...maybe you dont know as much as you think you do?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

"That's the theory ok, but there are no anti body tests that work, so there are no anti body tests.

Of course there's the possibility we don't develop Anti Bodies so there's nothing to detect.

Yet

No. That is the fact OK.

There is no possibility that “we don't develop Anti Bodies”, because that’s how all mammalian life responds to all viral infections.

And always has done.

That's how it always has done is perfectly correct

The future doesn't come with guarantees

Anyways we digress

Currently there is no anti body test that works

Then please exain why, after six attempts, I failed to develop Anti Bodies to Hep.b ? I'll pm you a copy of the doctors letter or even simpler google non responders, and that's for a pretty well known and documented virus

It's not known if either

1. We will (all) develop Anti Bodies to covid 19

2. Whether those that do develop Anti Bodies will have any sort of immunity or for how long.

I know more than you think

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest weekly all-causes death numbers, plus those for the previous three weeks for comparison copied from above:

10 April

Week 15______18,516

5-year avg_____10,520

Above avg by____7,996

CV-19 included___6,213

3 April

Week 14______16,387

5-year avg_____10,305

Above avg by___6,072

CV-19 included__3,475

27 March

Week 13______11,141

5-year avg_____10,130

Above avg by____1,011

CV-19 included____539

20 March

Week 12______10,645

5-year avg_____10,573

Above avg by______72

CV-19 included____103

These numbers are the results of counting all actual death certificates registered during each of the weeks.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Here are the latest weekly all-causes death numbers, plus those for the previous three weeks for comparison copied from above:

10 April

Week 15______18,516

5-year avg_____10,520

Above avg by____7,996

CV-19 included___6,213

3 April

Week 14______16,387

5-year avg_____10,305

Above avg by___6,072

CV-19 included__3,475

27 March

Week 13______11,141

5-year avg_____10,130

Above avg by____1,011

CV-19 included____539

20 March

Week 12______10,645

5-year avg_____10,573

Above avg by______72

CV-19 included____103

These numbers are the results of counting all actual death certificates registered during each of the weeks.

Bet your great fun on a night out

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *anejohnkent6263Couple over a year ago

canterbury

So all the shit that's happening ...is it worth it ....????

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

What would it have been without the current restrictions ?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *atandasmileMan over a year ago

Edinburgh

"What would it have been without the current restrictions ?"

Some modelling had predicted 3,000 deaths per day by last week if our social distancing hadn't kicked in. It might have been higher than that by now, but possibly not because I suspect people would be avoiding each other quite a lot of their own accord by that point, official lockdown or not.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest weekly all-causes death numbers, plus those for the previous three weeks for comparison copied from above:

17 April

Week 16______22,351

5-year avg_____10,497

Above avg by___11,854

CV-19 included___8,758

'10 April

Week 15______18,516

5-year avg_____10,520

Above avg by____7,996

CV-19 included___6,213

3 April

Week 14______16,387

5-year avg_____10,305

Above avg by___6,072

CV-19 included__3,475

27 March

Week 13______11,141

5-year avg_____10,130

Above avg by____1,011

CV-19 included____539

Weekly deaths will go below the 5-year average after the pandemic has run its course, due to lack of those premature deaths which were caused by the virus, and are included earlier in the year.

For an idea of the virus mortality rate, we will have to compare figures for the whole of year 2020 with the 5-year yearly average. So far, there have been 207,311 deaths this year, which compares with the five-year average of 185,190, and is 22,121 greater.

Yes, I know that my numbers are different from the OFNS ones by 10 and 26. I have emailed Sarah for an explanation.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest weekly all-causes death numbers, plus those for the previous three weeks for comparison.

24 April

Week 17______21,997

5-year avg_____10,458

Above avg by___11,539

CV-19 included___8,237

17 April

Week 16______22,347

5-year avg_____10,524

Above avg by___11,823

CV-19 included___8,758

'10 April

Week 15______18,516

5-year avg_____10,521

Above avg by____7,995

CV-19 included___6,213

3 April

Week 14______16,385

5-year avg_____10,307

Above avg by____6,078

CV-19 included___3,475

The numbers for this week are provisional.

The numbers for the last three weeks are adjusted, and different from those reported previously, which were all provisional.

So far, there have been 229,294 deaths this year, which compares with the five-year average of 195,701, and is 33,593 greater. These are the sums of the adjusted weekly numbers, except for 24th April, which are provisional.

If the weekly death toll has peaked during the week to 17th April, the weekly deaths could return to about average in five weeks time, i.e. 22nd May. The weekly death rate should then go below average, perhaps for another ten weeks. By then, we should be starting to find out what the cost to the country’s economy, and to our way of life, is likely to be.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest weekly all-causes death numbers, plus those for the previous three weeks for comparison.

1 May

Week 18______17,953

5-year avg______9,941

Above avg by____8,012

CV-19 included___6,035

24 April

Week 17______22,001

5-year avg_____10,440

Above avg by___11,539

CV-19 included___8,237

17 April

Week 16______22,347

5-year avg_____10,524

Above avg by___11,823

CV-19 included___8,758

'10 April

Week 15______18,516

5-year avg_____10,521

Above avg by____7,995

CV-19 included___6,213

So far, there have been 247,251 deaths this year, which compares with the five-year average of 205,621, and is 41,627 greater. These are the sums of the adjusted weekly numbers, except for 1st May, which are provisional.

So the above average deaths per week DID peak during the week to the 17th April. When will they return to average, what level can the NHS cope with, and what is going to happen when lock-down is relaxed?

You can be certain that the lunatic politicians will get ALL of the answers wrong!

If lockdown is relaxed when the number of deaths return to average, then the resulting increased deaths caused by the virus could be off-set by the reduced number of deaths due to the people who should have died during the week, but who died prematurely because of the virus.

From an NHS point of view, ideally, the number of deaths per week should be around average for the rest of the year. That, of course, will not happen. If the number of any week’s deaths falls below average, then the country’s economy will have been needlessly damaged by any preventative measures in force during that week.

If the rate at which the infections subside is similar to the rate at which it built up, then the weekly death rate should return to average in about the week ending 29th May.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Did you happen to check the weekly average deaths against previous years?

Some quite interesting statistics

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *olly_chromaticTV/TS over a year ago

Stockport

"Did you happen to check the weekly average deaths against previous years?

Some quite interesting statistics"

The statistics are listed above. Since late march they show, to use a technical term, a shitload of excess deaths above the averages for previous years.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *atandasmileMan over a year ago

Edinburgh

"Did you happen to check the weekly average deaths against previous years?

Some quite interesting statistics

The statistics are listed above. Since late march they show, to use a technical term, a shitload of excess deaths above the averages for previous years."

I was thinking a fuckton but maybe that's just some difference between metric and imperial swearloads

For me these statistics confirm (and have done for some time) that covid 19 has killed lots of people, and is capable of doing so to more if we're not careful. This seemed the subject of considerable debate a few weeks ago, although that seems to have subsided now.

Meanwhile there is some good news in here: these figures show a sharp decline in the number of people dying of covid 19. Given that they are out of date by almost two weeks when published (due to the time and care taken to compile them properly) we can expect and hope that the number of deaths actually happening "now" has declined yet further. And the number of new infections ought to be falling even in advance of those two.

All providing we have kept up control measures well enough in the meantime to keep the dreaded "R" below 1.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Mummy, you are not alone! THREE people have read these posts too.

Today, the BBC News website published “Weekly All Causes Deaths” numbers that are substantially larger then those of the ones above. This is because they are for the whole of the U.K, whereas the ONS ones are for only England and Wales.

Scotland has a significantly lower population density than England, and the Irish drink lots of Guinness.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

"Did you happen to check the weekly average deaths against previous years?

Some quite interesting statistics"

No, I have just copied the ONS numbers. The five-year averages are one of the best comparisons. For example, last year’s winter numbers were higher because the flu vaccine was ineffective – they guessed the virus stain wrongly. During both of the winters of 2014-5 and 2017-18 there were over 26,000 deaths associated with flu, more than twice the “normal” average.

The BBC News website article has an interesting graph which shows the variations from average for previous years. Wish I could show it here.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

CORRECTION

The graph is on the ONS website, section 3, “Deaths registered by week”.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No, I have just copied the ONS numbers. The five-year averages are one of the best comparisons.

How so? If 28000 people died in year 1, then only 500 die each year for 4 years, the 5 year average would show 6000 per year as a 5 year average.

That's an extreme example, but it's relevent in that the average numbers CAN be very inaccurate compared to individual weekly totals.

For example, last year’s winter numbers were higher because the flu vaccine was ineffective – they guessed the virus stain wrongly. During both of the winters of 2014-5 and 2017-18 there were over 26,000 deaths associated with flu, more than twice the “normal” average.

So, you mean to say that the global pandemic we are currently experiencing, is worse because we didn't see it coming?

The fact that during multiple years, the vaccine for the flu has been ineffective, causing much greater death counts than acceptable, is MUCH more worrying, as it shows an astounding level of incompetence and disregard for life, that has been going on for years, and is relatively undiscussed.

Viral strains are very specific, and the vaccine needs to be tested, retested, and confirmed working, not just guessed and thrown at the public to watch them die, at as you said, more than twice the normal average.

There is too much weight being put on this current pandemic, considering media sources claiming numbers 7000 greater than is actually recorded.

Yesterday, the guardian reported death toll in the UK surpassed 40000, yet, today, it's only just broken 33000

Lastly, rushing the vaccine, is it really a good idea if they can't even get the vaccine for the flu correct over multiple years?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

There is too much weight being put on this current pandemic, considering media sources claiming numbers 7000 greater than is actually recorded.

Yesterday, the guardian reported death toll in the UK surpassed 40000, yet, today, it's only just broken 33000

Lastly, rushing the vaccine, is it really a good idea if they can't even get the vaccine for the flu correct over multiple years?"

The exess deaths were circa 50000 and covid accounted for circa 32000 that means circa 18000 more people died than average, some could have been Covid but not tested but many will be people who would normally have gone to hospital with things like heart attacks but didn't probably because of the assholes scaremongering and advising people not to go near a hospital or they will get Covid. Sad reality.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

“That's an extreme example, but it's relevant in that the average numbers CAN be very inaccurate compared to individual weekly totals.”

Agreed. The ONS’s graph shows the sometimes wide variations from the averages. Does any one know of any better published numbers that could be used to indicate the stress under which the NHS people are working? And measure the incompetence of the lunatic politicians?

“So, you mean to say that the global pandemic we are currently experiencing, is worse because we didn't see it coming?”

No I don’t mean anything like this. I’m sorry if I gave the impression that I do.

With regards to the flu virus, my understanding is that there are at least four different major “strains” or “varieties”, and they are all mutating in various ways all of the time. Scientists have to guess what relevant mutations will take place for each winter, and tailor the various vaccines to counter them. The lunatic politicians will not provide the NHS with sufficient funds, so it can’t afford to provide vaccinations against all variants of all of the strains each year. They force the scientists to guess which strains are likely to be prevalent, and vaccinate against only those. I think they guess right about once every three years.

Comprehensive records of flu related deaths have been maintained, so that it is possible to remove them from the weekly total all-causes numbers. What’s left would provide better averages for comparisons with numbers for the period of the pandemic. They would show approximately how many deaths Corvid-19 has caused. But we also want to know the acceptable limits of what levels of infection the NHS can cope with. The unadjusted ONS average help to show these.

My overall concern is with the balance between the additional Corvid-19 workload on the NHS, and the very serious damage that the countermeasures are doing the economy of this country.

How many preventable deaths are acceptable? There seems to be no limit at all. We tacitly accept huge numbers of deaths caused by traffic accidents, smoking, recreational drugs, alcohol, flu, etc. The NHS has to cope with these as best it can with the meagre resources available. So what’s so special about yet more deaths resulting from an incurable disease? Ask your local M.P.!

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

But we shouldn't be specifically looking at deaths caused by covid, as it's not feasible at the moment.

The testing isn't perfect, and the media are skewing numbers left and right.

That's why we should be looking at total deaths in regards to previous years on a week by week basis.

It's then that we can estimate the actual number of deaths, as this is the first time that we know of, that covid has surfaced.

Tolls from 2019 to 2018 were relatively similar, so it's fair to speculate that the tolls for 2020 should be also, except with covid, they're expected to be higher.

It's this variance that gives us probably the most accurate number of ACTUAL covid deaths.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Unfortunately, weekly all causes death numbers for this winter and the last one can’t be directly compared because the flu virus worked for this winter, but not for the last one. So any comparisons would have to take this into account. Prior to the virus, weekly deaths were running at about 500 below average (see the original numbers above).

The media will continue to publish a number of different, conflicting and inaccurate statistics, and the lunatic politicians will use them to escape responsibility for any unnecessary, serious, and probably irreparable damage to our country’s economy.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I'm not factoring winter....

Take each week against the corresponding week from the previous years.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

There is a sort of statistical pendulum. Flu causes an above-average number of deaths during its weeks of high infection. But when the virus dies out, the pendulum swings to the other side. Deaths drop below average because of the absence of the old and infirm who were killed prematurely by the virus.

The use of the five-year averages is an attempt to iron-out these swings and give a better measure of the effect of C-19 virus.

The extent to which the pendulum swings to below-average with the C-19 pandemic will show the benefit or otherwise of the Government’s attempts to spread the load on the NHS.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest weekly all-causes death numbers, plus those for the previous three weeks for comparison.

8 May

Week 19______12,657

5-year avg______9,576

Above avg by____3,081

CV-19 included___3,930

1 May

Week 18______17,951

5-year avg______9,905

Above avg by____8,046

CV-19 included___6,035

24 April

Week 17______22,001

5-year avg_____10,440

Above avg by___11,539

CV-19 included___8,237

17 April

Week 16______22,347

5-year avg_____10,524

Above avg by___11,823

CV-19 included___8,758

Note: The numbers for the latest week are provisional, and the rest are adjusted.

The number of deaths above average continues to decline, and it looks like they will have dropped to around average for next week.

During the week to the 8th May, the number of deaths were above average by only 3,081, but they include 3,930 deaths where the words “Covid-19” appeared on the death certificates.

If C-19 had caused the deaths of 3,930 people, it would imply that “normal” deaths would have been 849 below average – not very likely. Perhaps around 3,000 of the additional people were killed by the virus, and about 1,000 had the virus, but would have died from other causes even if they hadn’t had it.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest weekly all-causes death numbers, plus those for the previous three weeks for comparison.

15 May

Week 20______14,573

5-year avg_____10,188

Above avg by____4,385

CV-19 included___8,758

8 May

Week 19______12,651

5-year avg______9,577

Above avg by____3,074

CV-19 included___3,930

1 May

Week 18______17,951

5-year avg______9,905

Above avg by____8,046

CV-19 included___6,035

24 April

Week 17______22,001

5-year avg_____10,440

Above avg by___11,539

CV-19 included___8,237

Note: The numbers for the latest week are provisional, and the rest are adjusted.

The number of deaths above average has increased, reversing the recent trend. But the numbers are effected by the bank holiday weekend. They are not strictly comparable with the five year average.

Lockdown was eased during the following week. The effect on the numbers will be interesting. Will the number of deaths be held near the average, successfully spreading the NHS workload? Or will they dip below, indicating that the easing could have started sooner? Only time will tell!

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

Thanks Op, interesting or worrying that the number has risen..?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

According to the ONS website, “The early May Bank Holiday contributed to both the decrease in the number of deaths registered in Week 19 and the increase in the number of deaths registered in Week 20, as deaths were unlikely to be registered on Friday 8 May. Next week’s report will allow a better assessment of recent trends in the number of all-cause deaths and deaths related to COVID.”

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Error: The “Cv-19 included” number should have been 3,810, not 8,758.

(I cut / pasted week 16’s numbers up as a template for week 20, but failed to update the last number).

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"Error: The “Cv-19 included” number should have been 3,810, not 8,758.

(I cut / pasted week 16’s numbers up as a template for week 20, but failed to update the last number).

Cheers..

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

[Removed by poster at 02/06/20 13:28:54]

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest weekly all-causes death numbers, plus those for the previous three weeks for comparison.

22 May

Week 21______12,288

5-year avg______9,940

Above avg by____2,348

CV-19 included___2,589

15 May

Week 20______14,571

5-year avg_____10,188

Above avg by____4,383

CV-19 included___8,758 – error, should have been 3,810

8 May

Week 19______12,651

5-year avg______9,577

Above avg by____3,074

CV-19 included___3,930

1 May

Week 18______17,951

5-year avg______9,905

Above avg by____8,046

CV-19 included___6,035

Note: The numbers for the latest week are provisional, and the rest are adjusted.

This is the pattern of the number of deaths above average:

Week number__12__Deaths above average___580

_____________13_______________________519

_____________14______________________6,078

_____________15______________________7,995

_________________________________________

_____________16_____________________11,823 Peak

_________________________________________

_____________17_____________________11,539

_____________18______________________8,046

_____________19______________________3,074

_____________20______________________4,383

_____________21______________________2,348

Without political intervention, it may be that deaths would have returned to about average by now, but the peak would have been much higher. So it looks like the lockdown succeeded in reducing the NHS workload during the worst weeks, at least to some extent. Future stats. will give a clearer picture.

(More than one space in a row are not allowed in posts, which makes decent presentation difficult.)

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

God's sake dont be confusing people with facts, especially when the facts are positive, they'll have nothing left to complain about.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

It's OK. People don't read this thread. Only nerds like me!

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *oft_SensualTV/TS over a year ago

Yorkshire

Evidence and reason seem to have gone out the window over the last four years, inane videos on Facebook seem to dictate people's thinking.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"It's OK. People don't read this thread. Only nerds like me!"

I do..

It's one I look for, its clear and concise and easily understood by none nerdies like me..

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

29 May

Week 22.________9,824

5-year avg_______8,171

Above avg by.____1.653

CV-19 included___1,822

22 May

Week 21._______12,287

5-year avg_______9,940

Above avg by.____2,347

CV-19 included___2,589

Here as a bar chart of the number of deaths above average for each week. It is representational, not accurate. It’s the best that I can do using unformatted text.

_____________________________________________________

|_______________________|_____________________________

|_______________________|_|____________________________D

|_______________________|_|____________________________E

|_______________________|_|____________________________A

|_______________________|_|____________________________T

|_______________________|_|____________________________H

|_______________________|_|____________________________S

|_______________________|_|____________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|___________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|___________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|___________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|___________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|___________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|___________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|___________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|=================================================== Average

|____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________________________B

|._____|_._|____________________________________________E

|..____________________________________________________L

|..____________________________________________________O

|..____________________________________________________W

WEEKS from 3rd January

The politicians tried to reduce the number of deaths at the peak of the epidemic – to squash the curve to the right. This would have prolonged the period during which deaths would have been above average. As you can see, the death rate is approaching average already. Better counter-measures at the start of the outbreak would have reduced the peak number of deaths, and extended the period of excess deaths at a level that the NHS could cope with for weeks, if not months. We’ll never know any real numbers.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

5 June

Week 23._______10,709

5-year avg_______9,977

Above avg by______732

CV-19 included___1,588

29 May

Week 22.________9,822

5-year avg_______8,171

Above avg by.____1.651

CV-19 included___1,822

Here is the up-dated bar chart of the number of deaths above or below average for each week. It is representational, not accurate.

|_______________________|_____________________________

|_______________________|_|____________________________D

|_______________________|_|____________________________E

|_______________________|_|____________________________A

|_______________________|_|____________________________T

|_______________________|_|____________________________H

|_______________________|_|____________________________S

|_______________________|_|____________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|___________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|___________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|___________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|___________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|___________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|___________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|___________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________

|=================================================== Average

|____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________________________B

|._____|_._|____________________________________________E

|..____________________________________________________L

|..____________________________________________________O

|..____________________________________________________W

WEEKS from 3rd January

Deaths are now down to a level that the NHS is used to coping with.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ethnmelvCouple over a year ago

Cardiff

& the total cumulative excess deaths in The Covid period is 63,500 plus - The Telegraph, 2 June 2020....

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

According to the Office For National Statistics, the numbers for this year so far, from the 3 January to the 5 June are:

Deaths from all causes.....307,312

Five year average.............253,441

Excess deaths....................53,871

The O.N.S. numbers are for England and Wales only. The Telegraph ones may be for the whole U.K.

“Lies, damned lies and ..........”

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

well if the excess deaths on the 5 year average are more than 20k the lockdown appears to be the issue/cause behind this..so has lockdown worked or been a cause of 20k excess deaths judging by the figures that have been posted..are these patients that haven't been treated because of lockdown and almost total focus on covid 19 cases ??

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ilancsguyMan over a year ago

Burnley

The crux of the issue has to be how many people have had it or have got it who have not been tested. The official figures as at 15th June showed 298136 had tested positive for Covid19. Sadly we know around 42,000 of those have died.

Looking at the total who have tested positive against a UK population of 67.8m people means 0.44% of the population have tested positive which would mean 99.56% haven't. Therefore the prevalence of Covid19 in non-tested people has to be very significant.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

Agree with the above, until we have a much more comprehensive testing programme then we have no idea..

Barrow in furness is highlighted as a hot spot but they have carried out on averages two and a half times more testing than other areas..

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

12 June

Week 24.________9,976

5-year avg_______9,417

Above avg by______559

CV-19 included___1,588

5 June

Week 23._______10,704

5-year avg_______9,977

Above avg by______732

CV-19 included___1,114

Here is a bar chart of the number of deaths above or below average for each week. It is representational, not accurate.

|_______________________|______________________________

|_______________________|_|__b__________________________D

|_______________________|_|_. a__________________________E

|_______________________|_|__n__________________________A

|_______________________|_|__k__________________________T

|_______________________|_|_____________________________H

|_______________________|_|__h__________________________S

|_______________________|_|__o__________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|_i__________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|_d_________________________.v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. a_________________________.e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. y__________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. s_________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|___________________

|=================================================== Average

|____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________________________B

|._____|_._|____________________________________________E

|..____________________________________________________L

|..____________________________________________________O

|..____________________________________________________W

...............................WEEKS from 3rd January....................................

The death rate continues to be above average, demonstrating that lockdown was successful, at least to some extent.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

There is no possibility that “we don't develop Anti Bodies”, because that’s how all mammalian life responds to all viral infections.

And always has done.

You've heard of HIV yes?

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

My local STD clinic tests for H.I.V. antibodies. Until after February 2019, the “incubation period” was four weeks. But in February this year I was told to wait six weeks, because the four-week period was producing too many false negatives. Evidently, some very exceptional people can take up to six MONTHS to produce a detectable level of antibodies. We’re all different!

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers for England and Wales, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

19 June

Week 25.________9,339

5-year avg_______9,404

Below avg by_______65

CV-19 included.____783

12 June

Week 24.________9,977

5-year avg_______9,417

Above avg by______560

CV-19 included___1,114

Here is a bar chart of the number of deaths above or below average for each week. It is representational, not accurate.

|_______________________|______________________________

|_______________________|_|__b__________________________D

|_______________________|_|_. a__________________________E

|_______________________|_|__n__________________________A

|_______________________|_|__k__________________________T

|_______________________|_|_____________________________H

|_______________________|_|__h__________________________S

|_______________________|_|__o__________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|_i__________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|_d_________________________.v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. a_________________________.e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. y__________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. s_________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|__________________

|=================================================== Average

|____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________|________________B

|._____|_._|____________________________________________E

|..____________________________________________________L

|..____________________________________________________O

|..____________________________________________________W

...............................WEEKS from 3rd January....................................

Deaths for the week were below average because of the people who were killed prematurely by the virus.

The number of deaths above average grew to its peak in four weeks. It could be that the return should have taken just four weeks also. If so, the measures taken by the politicians have extended that return by an extra four weeks, and probably lowered the peak excess deaths. The NHS staff has benefited from this, and were probably able to save more lives in consequence. Better and earlier political action could have extended the period during which the deaths remained at a manageable level above average, and saved more lives.

But we still don’t yet know how many people the virus killed. Time will tell.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers for England and Wales, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

26 June

Week 26.________8,979

5-year avg_______9,203

Below avg by______314

CV-19 included.____606

19 June

Week 25.________9,338

5-year avg_______9,404

Below avg by_______66

CV-19 included.____783

Here is a bar chart of the number of deaths above or below average for each week. It is representational, not accurate.

|_______________________|______________________________

|_______________________|_|__b__________________________D

|_______________________|_|_. a__________________________E

|_______________________|_|__n__________________________A

|_______________________|_|__k__________________________T

|_______________________|_|_____________________________H

|_______________________|_|__h__________________________S

|_______________________|_|__o__________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|_i__________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|_d_________________________.v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. a_________________________.e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. y__________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. s_________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|__________________

|=================================================== Average

|____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________|_|_______________B

|._____|_._|____________________________________________E

|..____________________________________________________L

|..____________________________________________________O

|..____________________________________________________W

...............................WEEKS from 3rd January....................................

Deaths for the week were below average again.

For the year from the 3rd January, the cumulative number of deaths above average peaked at 54,403 during the week to the 12th June. After the following two weeks, that excess has reduced to 54,023, reflecting the number of premature deaths that the virus has caused.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers for England and Wales, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

3 July

Week 27.________9,140

5-year avg_______9,183

Below avg by_______43

CV-19 included.____532

26 June

Week 26.________8,978

5-year avg_______9,293

Below avg by______315

CV-19 included.____606

Here is a bar chart of the number of deaths above or below average for each week. It is representational, not accurate.

|_______________________|______________________________

|_______________________|_|__b__________________________D

|_______________________|_|_. a__________________________E

|_______________________|_|__n__________________________A

|_______________________|_|__k__________________________T

|_______________________|_|_____________________________H

|_______________________|_|__h__________________________S

|_______________________|_|__o__________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|_i__________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|_d_________________________.v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. a_________________________.e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. y__________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. s_________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|__________________

|=================================================== Average

|____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________|_|_|_____________B

|._____|_._|____________________________________________E

|..____________________________________________________L

|..____________________________________________________O

|..____________________________________________________W

...............................WEEKS from 3rd January....................................

Deaths for the week were below average for the third week, and the cumulative number of deaths above average has reduced by 43 from

54,022 to 53,979.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers for England and Wales, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

10 July

Week 28.________8,690

5-year avg_______9,250

Below avg by______560

CV-19 included.____366

3 July

Week 27.________9,140

5-year avg_______9,183

Below avg by_______43

CV-19 included.____532

Here is a bar chart of the number of deaths above or below average for each week. It is representational, not accurate.

|_______________________|______________________________

|_______________________|_|__b__________________________D

|_______________________|_|_. a__________________________E

|_______________________|_|__n__________________________A

|_______________________|_|__k__________________________T

|_______________________|_|_____________________________H

|_______________________|_|__h__________________________S

|_______________________|_|__o__________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|_i__________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|_d_________________________.v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. a_________________________.e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. y__________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. s_________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|__________________

|=================================================== Average

|____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________|_|_|_|____________B

|._____|_._|____________________________________________E

|..____________________________________________________L

|..____________________________________________________O

|..____________________________________________________W

...............................WEEKS from 3rd January....................................

Deaths for the week were below average for the fourth week, and the cumulative number of deaths above average has reduced by 560 from

53,979 to 53,419.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"The major problem as I can see it is nobodys getting tested for antibodies to see who’s had it and that’s the key factor in this. I know at least 4 people plus myself that have been through it and recovered, how many people have had it with mild and no symptoms, it could possibly be in the millions which would bring the mortality figures more in line with other virus’s. Those huge spikes we are seeing are for figures of people that unfortunately are seriously ill, going to hospital and getting tested and then go on to die, these figures are seriously disproportionate to the true ratios. Fingers crossed it’s already run rampant through the country and gone through millions of people already without too much suffering and the “herd immunity” is kicking in. When we all start getting tested for antibodies we will understand what’s going on here and we’ll see the true ratio, we may find that this isn’t the zombie apocalypse and that there’s a light at the end of the tunnel sooner than we think. We desperately need to be tested for antibodies so we can get the country back up and running.

Respect to the NHS and frontliners and Reflect to the people who are suffering and passed away"

There is a bit of insight from the antibody testing at hospitals and throughout the emergency services. All trusts have opened free testing for employees and the uptake has been high.

If you consider that as a group our exposure to the virus is pretty high the results are surprisingly low. All the hospitals in my trust have averaged between 5-15% of staff showing as positive (with an understanding that 20% of positive tests read as Negative). I should also point out we are Manchester CC so are a heavily populated area which for long periods topped the weekly deaths etc during the crisis.

It can only be taken as an indicator but I think it suggests that we are a long way away as a population from the exposure required for concepts like herd immunity.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *obka3Couple over a year ago

bournemouth

K had her antibody test last week as works in the nhs came back negative, which was a surprise as we both had mild symptoms in France early Feb. To my mind that shows one of three things A antibodies dont last very long B a mild infection produces a poor antibody level that goes quickly or C its nowhere near as infectious we think

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ir-spunk-alotMan over a year ago

Southern England

"K had her antibody test last week as works in the nhs came back negative, which was a surprise as we both had mild symptoms in France early Feb. To my mind that shows one of three things A antibodies dont last very long B a mild infection produces a poor antibody level that goes quickly or C its nowhere near as infectious we think"

Or D, you didnt have it.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *rotic-TouchTV/TS over a year ago

doncaster

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ylonSlutTV/TS over a year ago

Durham

Or could be D had a different virus. Could equally likely be A or C.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

There was quite a bit of reporting that the antibodies seem to be only lasting 2-3 months in most cases. The test is also 80% accurate, I’ve swabbed positive for the virus in March but my AB test is negative

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers for England and Wales, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

17 July

Week 27.________8,823

5-year avg_______9,093

Below avg by______270

CV-19 included.____295

10 July

Week 28.________8,689

5-year avg_______9,250

Below avg by______561

CV-19 included.____366

Here is a bar chart of the number of deaths above or below average for each week. It is representational, not accurate.

|_______________________|______________________________

|_______________________|_|__b__________________________D

|_______________________|_|_. a__________________________E

|_______________________|_|__n__________________________A

|_______________________|_|__k__________________________T

|_______________________|_|_____________________________H

|_______________________|_|__h__________________________S

|_______________________|_|__o__________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|_i__________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|_d_________________________.v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. a_________________________.e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. y__________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. s_________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|__________________

|=================================================== Average

|____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________|_|_|_|_|___________B

|._____|_._|____________________________________________E

|..____________________________________________________L

|..____________________________________________________O

|..____________________________________________________W

...............................WEEKS from 3rd January....................................

Deaths for the week were below average for the fifth consecutive week, and the cumulative number of deaths above average has reduced by 560 from

53,419 to 53,148.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers for England and Wales, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

24 July

Week 30.________8,891

5-year avg_______9,052

Below avg by.______161

CV-19 included_____217

17 July

Week 29.________8,823

5-year avg_______9,093

Below avg by______270

CV-19 included.____295

Here is a bar chart of the number of deaths above or below average for each week. It is representational, not accurate.

|_______________________|______________________________

|_______________________|_|__b__________________________D

|_______________________|_|_. a__________________________E

|_______________________|_|__n__________________________A

|_______________________|_|__k__________________________T

|_______________________|_|_____________________________H

|_______________________|_|__h__________________________S

|_______________________|_|__o__________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|_i__________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|_d_________________________.v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. a_________________________.e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. y__________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. s_________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|__________________

|=================================================== Average

|____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_________B

|._____|_._|____________________________________________E

|..____________________________________________________L

|..____________________________________________________O

|..____________________________________________________W

...............................WEEKS from 3rd January....................................

Deaths for the week were below average for the sixth consecutive week, and the cumulative number of deaths above average has reduced by 161 from

53,148 to 52,987.

Why has there been no substantial reduction in the deaths during the last six weeks? This was anticipated because of the people who died prematurely due to the virus.

The answer may be that the “gap” has been filled by people who are still dying prematurely because of the lack of treatment during the height of the epidemic.

So we still have no reliable number for the total deaths due to the Covid-19 virus in England and Wales.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Posted 11-8-20

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers for England and Wales, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

31 July

Week 31.________8,946

5-year avg_______9,036

Below avg by_______90

CV-19 included.____193

24 July

Week 30.________8,889

5-year avg_______9,052

Below avg by.______163

CV-19 included_____217

Here is a bar chart of the number of deaths above or below average for each week. It is representational, not accurate.

|_______________________|______________________________

|_______________________|_|__b__________________________D

|_______________________|_|_. a__________________________E

|_______________________|_|__n__________________________A

|_______________________|_|__k__________________________T

|_______________________|_|_____________________________H

|_______________________|_|__h__________________________S

|_______________________|_|__o__________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l__________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|_i__________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|_d_________________________.v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. a_________________________.e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. y__________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. s_________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_____________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|__________________

|=================================================== Average

|.____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_______B

|._____|_._|____________________________________________E

|..____________________________________________________L

|..____________________________________________________O

|..____________________________________________________W

...............................WEEKS from 3rd January....................................

Deaths for the week were below average for the seventh consecutive week, and the cumulative number of deaths above average has reduced by 92 from

52,987 to 52,897.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers for England and Wales, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

7 August

Week 32.________8,945

5-year avg_______9,102

Below avg by.______157

CV-19 included_____152

31 July

Week 31.________8,945

5-year avg_______9,036

Below avg by_______91

CV-19 included.____193

Here is a bar chart of the number of deaths above or below average for each week. It is representational, not accurate.

|_______________________|______________________________________

|_______________________|_|__b________________________________D

|_______________________|_|_. a________________________________E

|_______________________|_|__n________________________________A

|_______________________|_|__k________________________________T

|_______________________|_|___________________________________H

|_______________________|_|__h________________________________S

|_______________________|_|__o_________________________________

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l________________________________a

|._____________________|_|_|_|_l________________________________b

|._____________________|_|_|_|_i________________________________o

|._____________________|_|_|_|_d_______________________________.v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. a_______________________________.e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. y________________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|. s_______________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|______________________________v

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|______________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_._|______________________________r

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|______________________________a

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________________g

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________________e

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|.___________________________

|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|__________________________

|_|_|______________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_________________________

|=================================================== Average

|.____|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________________|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|____________B

|______|_._|__________________________________________________E

|.___________________________________________________________L

|.___________________________________________________________O

|.___________________________________________________________W

.....................................WEEKS from 3rd January..........................................

Deaths for the week were below average again for the eighth consecutive week, and the cumulative number of deaths above average has reduced by 158 from 52,895 to 52,737. So there is still no sign of the anticipated reduction of deaths to well below average levels because of premature deaths of terminally ill people caused by the virus.

Reply privately (thread closed by moderator)

By *ait88 OP Man over a year ago

Plymouth

Here are the latest provisional all-causes death numbers for England and Wales, plus the adjusted ones for last week.

14 August

Week 33.________9,392

5-year avg_______9,085

Above avg by______307

CV-19 included.____139