Catweazle wrote:There you go again, accusing me of lying about there being a spike in deaths - I didn't write that there was a spike in deaths.
Again, you ignore the questions I ask about the lack of evidence to support your repeated claims that the people who have died would have died this year or shortly anyway.
Again, you post meaningless graphs to deflect attention from your mistaken assumptions.
It's impossible to reason with you if you continually obfuscate and attempt to divert attention.
Why should LJ have to prove the obvious that many elderly UK citizens die each year?
Take a look at the population distribution chart. https://www.indexmundi.com/united_kingd ... cture.html
The grim reaper swings a wider and wider swath with each year after age 60.
The assumption that someone catching covid19 at age 81 is already past the average life expectancy and therefore likely to die soon anyway is simply bad maths. Life expectancy at birth is very different to what you can expect if you've reached your 80's.
The FT can do sums...
For a start, each year that you manage to stay alive, your overall life expectancy increases. That means that while 81 is the average UK life expectancy at birth; by the time an average person has reached the venerable age of 79.5, they can expect to live for another nine or ten years, depending on their gender.
Initiation wrote:On the 'died in the next year' question. Around 20,000 deaths with covid have occured in care home residents - a bit less than half of all covid deaths. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... rovisional
https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/33895/1/dp2769.pdf
The median stay in a care home is reportedly 19.6 months. Now obviously not all care home residents arrived on day 1 of the pandemic, so lets assume a normal distribution and the average resident had been in a home for 9.8 months prior to the pandemic.
As nearly all care home residents leave in a coffin, that would lead to the conclusion that yes, over half of these (10,000) would have likely died within a year. That is conservative as it ignores any effects on the distribution of comorbidities.
75% of residents (so 15,000 of the care home deaths) would be expected to die within 2.6 years of the nominal start of the pandemic.
Other deaths in older people (e.g. those living at home or with family) are in addition to this.
That doesn't seem an unreasonable assumption, thanks.
So from those figures between a quarter and a fifth of covid fatalities would have died within a year-ish, they being the very frailest of casualties.
Another quarter would have perished within, say, 3 years.
The remaining old-aged casualties would normally have expected to live 10 more years.
Of course, as the infection spreads more widely in the general population the thousands and thousands of old folks who are not in nursing homes, and still have 10+ years on the clock will be dropping like flies too.
They would have already, if someone in government hadn't been able to do the maths and work out that they weren't all about to snuff it this year anyway.
So when you read of a 90 year old man killed by covid, don't think he was on borrowed time.
So, no-one who who makes it to 94 dies at 94 then. Because they all live to 97...right?
Jesus wept. Do I really need to explain this? Clearly I do...
If you are 94, you are more likely to make it to 97 than a 75 year old.
That is all.
You are not particularly likely to make it to 97 per se. Just more likely than if you were 75.
If you are 94 you will be significantly less likely, in fact, to live another 4 years than if you were 75.
You are statistically illiterate. Which is clearly why it has proved so very easy for the government to bamboozle you with bullshit via an ever compliant mainstream media over this issue. Either that, or the bullshit has made you quite deranged.
Last edited by Little John on 15 Oct 2020, 12:35, edited 5 times in total.
So when you read of a 90 year old man killed by covid, don't think he was on borrowed time.
So, no-one who who makes it to 94 dies at 94 then. Because they all live to 97...right?
Jesus wept. Do I really need to explain this? Clearly I do...
If you are 94, you are more likely to make it to 97 than a 75 year old.
That is all.
You are not particularly likely to make it to 97 per se. Just more likely than if you were 75.
If you are 94 you will be significantly less likely, in fact, to live another 4 years than if you were 75.
You are statistically illiterate. Which is clearly why it has proved so very easy for the government to bamboozle you with bullshit via an ever compliant mainstream media over this issue. Either that, or the bullshit has made you quite deranged.
Perhaps you should explain your statistical theories to the ONS, so they can make the necessary corrections to their online calculator and bring it in line with your own stats.
Or, given that you have now edited your post 5 times, perhaps a little more maths homework for yourself first.
So when you read of a 90 year old man killed by covid, don't think he was on borrowed time.
So, no-one who who makes it to 94 dies at 94 then. Because they all live to 97...right?
Jesus wept. Do I really need to explain this? Clearly I do...
If you are 94, you are more likely to make it to 97 than a 75 year old.
That is all.
You are not particularly likely to make it to 97 per se. Just more likely than if you were 75.
If you are 94 you will be significantly less likely, in fact, to live another 4 years than if you were 75.
You are statistically illiterate. Which is clearly why it has proved so very easy for the government to bamboozle you with bullshit via an ever compliant mainstream media over this issue. Either that, or the bullshit has made you quite deranged.
Perhaps you should explain your statistical theories to the ONS, so they can make the necessary corrections to their online calculator and bring it in line with your own stats.
Or, given that you have now edited your post 5 times, perhaps a little more maths homework for yourself first.
There can only be two or three explanations for this Catweazle.
Either you have allowed all of this fearmongering propaganda to short circuit your capacity for rational thought.
Or, you know full well now, deep down, it is all bullshit, but you have a hideously bloated ego that cannot allow you to stop digging given that you swallowed this bullshit early on. As did I as, it happens.
There is a fourth possibility, that I'm a traitorous petite bourgeoise remainer who sneers at the working classes and ingratiates himself with the globalist capitalist conspirator overlords.
Actually, I think you already did that one, a few times.
Ooh, a fifth one, I'm just an ordinary average bloke who thinks the world is going to shit, knows full well that there is a class of people getting rich off it, but doesn't see conspiracy around every corner.
We're not as different as you think (except for the conspiracy bit, obviously).
Catweazle wrote:There is a fourth possibility, that I'm a traitorous petite bourgeoise remainer who sneers at the working classes and ingratiates himself with the globalist capitalist conspirator overlords.
Actually, I think you already did that one, a few times.
Ooh, a fifth one, I'm just an ordinary average bloke who thinks the world is going to shit, knows full well that there is a class of people getting rich off it, but doesn't see conspiracy around every corner.
We're not as different as you think (except for the conspiracy bit, obviously).
Oh, don't you fret. The petite beurgois one is buried in number 1 and 2. All being petite bourgeois does is orient someone towards accepting whatever the dominant narrative is. This, is by, definition, its central characteristic. Your problem is that doing so at this time requires you to become quite deranged in your thinking. That's quite a psychological price you are paying for your continued alliance to that dominant narrative. I hope it's worth it.
So when you read of a 90 year old man killed by covid, don't think he was on borrowed time.
So, no-one who who makes it to 94 dies at 94 then. Because they all live to 97...right?
Jesus wept. Do I really need to explain this? Clearly I do...
If you are 94, you are more likely to make it to 97 than a 75 year old.
That is all.
You are not particularly likely to make it to 97 per se. Just more likely than if you were 75.
If you are 94 you will be significantly less likely, in fact, to live another 4 years than if you were 75.
You are statistically illiterate. Which is clearly why it has proved so very easy for the government to bamboozle you with bullshit via an ever compliant mainstream media over this issue. Either that, or the bullshit has made you quite deranged.
So when you read of a 90 year old man killed by covid, don't think he was on borrowed time.
So, no-one who who makes it to 94 dies at 94 then. Because they all live to 97...right?
Jesus wept. Do I really need to explain this? Clearly I do...
If you are 94, you are more likely to make it to 97 than a 75 year old.
That is all.
You are not particularly likely to make it to 97 per se. Just more likely than if you were 75.
If you are 94 you will be significantly less likely, in fact, to live another 4 years than if you were 75.
You are statistically illiterate. Which is clearly why it has proved so very easy for the government to bamboozle you with bullshit via an ever compliant mainstream media over this issue. Either that, or the bullshit has made you quite deranged.
You really are turning into a hysterical fool
When this is all over. When either the state has cranked its neck back in due to the backlash. Or, when everyone knows, with no more ambiguity possible, that their rights and liberties have been stripped from them on the back of lies, they will look around at who aided and abetted what has happened. At that point, I would not want to be someone like you.
One more time: If you are ninety AND in a nursing home your chances of getting to ninety-one are VERY low and only those not in a home are likely to beat the statistical average.
Think about it everyone in a home has at least one pre-existing comorbidity which is why they are in the home in the first place.
.
vtsnowedin wrote:One more time: If you are ninety AND in a nursing home your chances of getting to ninety-one are VERY low and only those not in a home are likely to beat the statistical average.
Think about it everyone in a home has at least one pre-existing comorbidity which is why they are in the home in the first place.
.
Nobody is arguing with that.
Catweazle wrote:
Initiation wrote:On the 'died in the next year' question. Around 20,000 deaths with covid have occured in care home residents - a bit less than half of all covid deaths. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... rovisional
https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/33895/1/dp2769.pdf
The median stay in a care home is reportedly 19.6 months. Now obviously not all care home residents arrived on day 1 of the pandemic, so lets assume a normal distribution and the average resident had been in a home for 9.8 months prior to the pandemic.
As nearly all care home residents leave in a coffin, that would lead to the conclusion that yes, over half of these (10,000) would have likely died within a year. That is conservative as it ignores any effects on the distribution of comorbidities.
75% of residents (so 15,000 of the care home deaths) would be expected to die within 2.6 years of the nominal start of the pandemic.
Other deaths in older people (e.g. those living at home or with family) are in addition to this.
That doesn't seem an unreasonable assumption, thanks.
So from those figures between a quarter and a fifth of covid fatalities would have died within a year-ish, they being the very frailest of casualties.
Another quarter would have perished within, say, 3 years.
The remaining old-aged casualties would normally have expected to live 10 more years.
Of course, as the infection spreads more widely in the general population the thousands and thousands of old folks who are not in nursing homes, and still have 10+ years on the clock will be dropping like flies too.
They would have already, if someone in government hadn't been able to do the maths and work out that they weren't all about to snuff it this year anyway.
Catweazle wrote:
Of course, as the infection spreads more widely in the general population the thousands and thousands of old folks who are not in nursing homes, and still have 10+ years on the clock will be dropping like flies too.
No a ninety year old not in a nursing home and without a comorbidity has a much higher chance of surviving Covid then the already sick nursing home patient. Their chances are not as good as a healthy twenty year old of course but they will not be "dropping like flies. "
