Wednesday Covid Update: 9,317 new cases and 87 deaths

[Thaiger]

The Centre for Covid-19 Situation Administration logged another 9,317 confirmed Covid-19 infections and 87 coronavirus-related deaths. In the latest and most severe wave of the virus, the CCSA has recorded 334,166 Covid-19 cases since April 1. The virus is still spreading in Thailand’s overcrowded prisons and health officials have been rolling out active testing to identify infections, even asymptomatic, and contain the virus. Out of the new cases reported today, 129 were found in correctional facilities. Over the past few months, more than 30,000 inmates at Thai prisons have tested positive for Covid-19. More information will be released following the […]

The post Wednesday Covid Update: 9,317 new cases and 87 deaths appeared first on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[AdamX]

What is the definition of "covid related death"?

[gummy]

6 minutes ago, AdamX said:

What is the definition of "covid related death"?

In the UK it is someone who has died with 28 days of contracting covid

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/public-health-england-death-data-revised/

[AdamX]

28 minutes ago, gummy said:

In the UK it is someone who has died with 28 days of contracting covid

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/public-health-england-death-data-revised/

Thank you for this

My observations:

1. Covid deaths will include deaths from cancer, accidents, diabetes and an endless list of non related diseases.  

2. The initial death toll numbers have been revised down, demonstrating that our earlier actions were based on exaggerated information

Conclusion

The term covid related deaths is truly misleading.

One needs to ask

1. Why are we conflating deaths from all causes with Covid?

2. Have we ever done this before?

3. Who specifically, designed and mandated this definition

 

[gummy]

1 minute ago, AdamX said:

Thank you for this

My observations:

1. Covid deaths will include deaths from cancer, accidents, diabetes and an endless list of non related diseases.  

2. The initial death toll numbers have been revised down, demonstrating that our earlier actions were based on exaggerated information

Conclusion

The term covid related deaths is truly misleading.

One needs to ask

1. Why are we conflating deaths from all causes with Covid?

2. Have we ever done this before?

3. Who specifically, designed and mandated this definition

Well suspect if you can answer this one question below you will also have the other answers

Who is set to gain most money out of this ?

Certainly in the UK there are many questions that have been raised highlighting these issues

[Paco]

Yep so iam next... diabetic

[Paco]

"Foreign residents are included in the national vaccine campaign."

no vaccines and only Bangkok when they have vaccines... pppfffff

[AdamX]

1 hour ago, gummy said:

 

Who is set to gain most money out of this ?

Certainly in the UK there are many questions that have been raised highlighting these issues

I have found that this is actually the first question that should always be asked when dealing with news. Everything else then makes sense

[Stonker]

2 hours ago, gummy said:

In the UK it is someone who has died with 28 days of contracting covid

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/public-health-england-death-data-revised/

That's not actually the full definition though, @gummy, which you can find at the NHS England website in their full Technical Summary if you click on the first link in your link to the CEBM.

 

As you can see there, at para 4.1, that's only one of two conditions / definitions and there are a number of direct limitations as well as indirect limitations governed by the sources of reports.

1 hour ago, AdamX said:

My observations:

1. Covid deaths will include deaths from cancer, accidents, diabetes and an endless list of non related diseases.  

True, just as it will exclude deaths from Covid-19 where Covid-19 is suspected but not confirmed by testing, as the NHSE link explains.

 

The inclusions and exclusions work both ways.

 

1 hour ago, AdamX said:

2. The initial death toll numbers have been revised down, demonstrating that our earlier actions were based on exaggerated information

Not necessarily "exaggerated", as the extra deaths that were included may well have been balanced out or even outweighed by the deaths that were excluded - particularly before testing was widespread, for example with the large number of excess deaths in care and nursing homes that were suspected to be from Covid but weren't logged as "Covid related"  as they were never tested.

 

You also need to consider that even in the very unlikely event that there were no deaths from Covid where people hadn't been tested, the initial numbers were only revised down by 12%, so I'd suggest that it's unlikely that things would have been done any differently if there had "only" been 112,000 reported deaths instead of 128,000.

 

Do you really think that would have made much difference to any decisions?

1 hour ago, AdamX said:

The term covid related deaths is truly misleading.

If you accept that deaths are inevitably  excluded as well as included, can you suggest a more accurate system given the unavoidable constraints, unless every dead body from any cause had a full autopsy?

 

1 hour ago, AdamX said:

One needs to ask

1. Why are we conflating deaths from all causes with Covid?

2. Have we ever done this before?

3. Who specifically, designed and mandated this definition

If you go to the link from NHS England you'll find these questions and several others asked and answered, in considerable detail, in Para 8, "Frequently asked questions", on pages 13, 14 and 15.

 

 

 

Edited July 14, 2021 by Stonker
typo

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, gummy said:

Certainly in the UK there are many questions that have been raised highlighting these issues

That's probably why the NHS calls them "Frequently asked questions"!!!

[AdamX]

10 hours ago, Stonker said:

True, just as it will exclude deaths from Covid-19 where Covid-19 is suspected but not confirmed by testing, as the NHSE link explains.

The inclusions and exclusions work both ways.

Can you provide an explicit example of a death that was caused by covid but could not be confirmed by testing?

 

[AdamX]

10 hours ago, Stonker said:

That's not actually the full definition though, @gummy, which you can find at the NHS England website in their full Technical Summary if you click on the first link in your link to the CEBM.

As you can see there, at para 4.1, that's only one of two conditions / definitions and there are a number of direct limitations as well as indirect limitations governed by the sources of reports.

True, just as it will exclude deaths from Covid-19 where Covid-19 is suspected but not confirmed by testing, as the NHSE link explains.

The inclusions and exclusions work both ways.

Not necessarily "exaggerated", as the extra deaths that were included may well have been balanced out or even outweighed by the deaths that were excluded - particularly before testing was widespread, for example with the large number of excess deaths in care and nursing homes that were suspected to be from Covid but weren't logged as "Covid related"  as they were never tested.

You also need to consider that even in the very unlikely event that there were no deaths from Covid where people hadn't been tested, the initial numbers were only revised down by 12%, so I'd suggest that it's unlikely that things would have been done any differently if there had "only" been 112,000 reported deaths instead of 128,000.

Do you really think that would have made much difference to any decisions?

If you accept that deaths are inevitably  excluded as well as included, can you suggest a more accurate system given the unavoidable constraints, unless every dead body from any cause had a full autopsy?

If you go to the link from NHS England you'll find these questions and several others asked and answered, in considerable detail, in Para 8, "Frequently asked questions", on pages 13, 14 and 15.

 

[AdamX]

Thank you for your analysis, but lets cut to the chase.

You don't think the use of the term "Covid Related Death" is novel, problematic, misleading and quite possibly conspiratorial. I do.

I respect your opinion, but my goal is not so much to win a debate, but to introduce people to another point of view.

Hopefully it encourages them to do their own research, for when they do, I've seen first hand how many begin to see that the truth is not something that we are told, its something we have to deduce

 

[AussieBob]

15 minutes ago, AdamX said:

Thank you for your analysis, but lets cut to the chase.

You don't think the use of the term "Covid Related Death" is novel, problematic, misleading and quite possibly conspiratorial. I do.

I respect your opinion, but my goal is not so much to win a debate, but to introduce people to another point of view.

Hopefully it encourages them to do their own research, for when they do, I've seen first hand how many begin to see that the truth is not something that we are told, its something we have to deduce

 

I think that over time what will emerge after Covid is a better understanding of exactly what deaths are caused by what issue.  In the past, people who had a 'heart failure' were classified as dying from 'heart disease' which is the number one reason for death in the world. But that is not necessarily the 'truth' as such, because without a full autopsy and toxicology analysis, it is often impossible to state exactly what caused the 'heart attack'.  It is like deaths from car accidents, unless there is something clearly at fault (wheel came off) the standard 'reason' documented by the police is 'speed' - but if there is any alcohol in a toxicology report after a death, the reason is changed to 'alcohol' whether there is any other reason to suspect that alcohol lead to the accidental death or not. That is why 'they' say that most accidents are caused by speed, and most deaths are caused by alcohol (in the west).

The official point of death is when the heart stops beating, and for millions of deaths it is not worth doing autopsies and toxicology reports - too costly and takes too long and uses up lots of resources.  But because of the Covid pandemic, a lot of people who died have a quick toxicology done now, and anyone with Covid present either before death or after death, are classified as dying 'due to Covid'.

My read is that in the future the authorities will learn that what is really needed is a far better and more accurate description of the reasons for death, and not treat each death like they do for a car accident - speed or alcohol, that will do mate, lets move on.  I do believe that a lot of deaths in the past were 'caused' by influenza and other viruses - because those infections exacerbated existing lung and heart and other medical problems (underlying issues).

 

[JamesE]

9 minutes ago, AussieBob said:

My read is that in the future the authorities will learn that what is really needed is a far better and more accurate description of the reasons for death, and not treat each death like they do for a car accident - speed or alcohol, that will do mate, lets move on.

There are, currently, some 7.5 billion people waiting to die. Is it really that imperative to describe each beyond: "You knew the job was dangerous when you took it"? Sure there may be some exceptions, forensic or epidemiologic, but for the vast majority "It happens to everybody" is probably sufficient.

[AussieBob]

1 minute ago, JamesE said:

There are, currently, some 7.5 billion people waiting to die. Is it really that imperative to describe each beyond: "You knew the job was dangerous when you took it"? Sure there may be some exceptions, forensic or epidemiologic, but for the vast majority "It happens to everybody" is probably sufficient.

Yep - we are all doomed to repeat the mistake of all before us. As Monty Phyton said: 'in the end the jokes on you - no one gets out alive'.  

With all the detailed focus on deaths due to covid - I can see that the need to know more accurately the real causes of deaths (bureaucrats rule after all), and that will lead to quick easy toxicology tests that can be utilised to feed their insatiable desire for more and more information and their desire to create rules to gain that information and store it. The world these days is run by beancounters and bureaucrats - and I reckon they will want to know.