Love this tweet

[Taintedice]

Absolutely incredible how some people are happy to look at a graph and declare 'oh look there's a picture that proves it' when if they just read into the source and collection methodology of the data and take note of the small print the nice colourful picture becomes completely different or even irrelevant.

The passage you highlighted is on the first graph at the top of the report, in the same typeface as all the other text

If you really had something, this shouldn't be such a struggle for you. Jan and Feb 2020, excess deaths were lower then after covid had been reduced significantly during first lockdown, the trend for excess deaths was again lower come June/July/Aug. Johnson refused to a circuit breaker in Sept when cases were rising again so it all kicks off once more with new strains from abroad.

[BCram]

Disappointed. I now don't understand anything Grantzer Deeranged and Taintedice have succeeded in undermining each other's theories which leaves me no closer to understanding the issue. I understand that the number of deaths are adjusted to remove exceptional influences. I now wonder why?

[Deeranged]

I understand that the number of deaths are adjusted to remove exceptional influences. I now wonder why?

Exactly.

[grantzer]

Disappointed. I now don't understand anything Grantzer Deeranged and Taintedice have succeeded in undermining each other's theories which leaves me no closer to understanding the issue. I understand that the number of deaths are adjusted to remove exceptional influences. I now wonder why?

If it's the expected deaths issue,I can try.

If I roll a dice,100 times and get 20 6s, then repeat and get 20 again. Do that 5 times and get 20 every time,then the sixth time I would expect to get 20.

Doesn't mean I will,but that's what I expect.

Now if on the sixth time,I uses loaded dice,and get 100 6s, the exceptional circumstance is the dice,and the figure would be adjusted to compensate for that.

Now with people dying,the exceptional circumstances won't be a loaded dice,but something that maybe kills a lot of people,but will probably only do it once, a tsunami for example.

If you left in the number of people the tsunami killed,it would skew the expected death figures,like the loaded dice did .

[Returnofrros]

Disappointed. I now don't understand anything Grantzer Deeranged and Taintedice have succeeded in undermining each other's theories which leaves me no closer to understanding the issue. I understand that the number of deaths are adjusted to remove exceptional influences. I now wonder why?

If you don't understand....blame it on the tories😁

If you really don't understand blame it on the English Tories.

If you are ****ed with nowhere to turn.....just lash out at everyone.😁

Easy peasy.....heres a graph.🤓

[grantzer]

If you don't understand....blame it on the tories😁

If you really don't understand blame it on the English Tories.

If you are ****ed with nowhere to turn.....just lash out at everyone.😁

Easy peasy.....heres a graph.🤓

Surely Mr sunshine should be blaming it on the boogie??

[BCram]

Thanks grantzer. Will try to find the equivalent of the loaded dice figure and see how that relates to the expected deaths. Keep posting, same request to Deeranged, Taintedice and Rross. I think you all have valuable comments to contribute. What I am hoping for is the total deaths and what has caused the adjustment to be made to give expected deaths. I do think there is merit in being critical of the assumption that all deaths where covid has been found, by testing, should be counted as covid deaths. Is that methodology used by other countries? If not, is it possible to restate our figures using say the French method? Being on lockdown is not great but this website helps to pass the hours and everyone being a Dee seems to make it friendlier.

[Taintedice]

Disappointed. I now don't understand anything Grantzer Deeranged and Taintedice have succeeded in undermining each other's theories which leaves me no closer to understanding the issue. I understand that the number of deaths are adjusted to remove exceptional influences. I now wonder why?

I don't have any theories, just the facts

[Taintedice]

I understand that the number of deaths are adjusted to remove exceptional influences. I now wonder why?

There hasn't been anything like that happening in previous years to impact on expected deaths for 2020, there has just been a steady increase in mortality since the tories came in because they like killing poor people.

We should be thankful this doesn't happen as much in Scotland thanks to the Queen in the North.

[islaydarkblue]

So basically you have no evidence that thousands of people died because their cancer treatment was stopped. In fact, less people died from cancer in 2020 than average. Thousands died from covid first, but they are dismissed .. because they had cancer.

But if we're now allowed to talk about worst-case scenarios, 500,000 people would be dead now without lockdown.

I have a relative who lives in a village near Oban.
Last May 2020 one of the residents in her village was receiving treatment for cancer at the Beatson in Glasgow. This person received a phone call asking if he wanted to come to the Beatson for his next course of treatment. He was delighted to accept and travelled to get his treatment staying in Gartnaval hospital which is next door to the Beatson hospital. Sadly this patient contracted the Covid-19 virus in Gartnaval hospital and sadly died.
If he had turned down the offer of his next round of cancer treatment he might still be alive.