This is what he posted:
"Two main statistics have been used to count coronavirus (COVID-19) deaths in England: death \registrations involving COVID-19 (reported by the ONS) and deaths within 28 days of a positive SARS-COV-2 test (reported by the UKHSA). The 28-day measure is a timely measure of COVID-19 deaths to inform public health response, but less precise than death registrations which consider the cause of death.
When compared, the 2 measures closely tracked one another (85 to 90% correlation) between May 2020 and December 2021.
85% to 90% correlation would mean covid death stats were over-stated by up to 15%.
As soon as she thought she saw something she liked she stopped reading, and missed the fact that initially ["When compared, the 2 measures closely tracked one another (85 to 90% correlation) between May 2020 and December 2021. The UKHSA (28 day) measure under-reported deaths at the very start of the pandemic..."
It doesn't seem to have occurred to her that "85 to 90%" could be interpreted any other way than how she thought it should be.
Not that it matters.
The fact remains that her claims that "They didn’t adjust the stats prior to this" is just more misinformation.
You know you look better if you admit you’re wrong or simply stay silent, right? Only one of the 2 calculations could possibly be higher. We both know which one it is. Everyone knows which one it is. No need to play dumb. Hint, it’s the one that counts a broader range of deaths as covid deaths, the one that specifically says in your posted quote that it’s less precise, which also happens to be the one used for official death counts up to a few months ago.
Nevertheless, i was being generous. Could be overstated by more than 15%. If the actual count shows, say 85 deaths, and the count with the overstated number shows 100 deaths (85% correlation), that would be overstated by 17.6%.
I know. But it’s ironic that I’m explaining the facts that he submitted but didn’t understand. He’s in denial now and that’s quite funny.
She seems confused.
She's claiming to acknowledge that the clinical count has been around since 2020 at the same time she's claiming only the eventually less accurate 28 day count was being used until recently.
She can't have it both ways.
I wonder what part of "The UKHSA (28 day) measure under-reported deaths at the very start of the pandemic..." is unclear to her folks.
you forgot to include the most important part, on purpose… for the first two months. This was prior to mass testing. From then on, deaths were over-reported.
The second test - the clinically verified death from covid, the one you refuse to acknowledge - has been in use for over three years: "Death registrations are collated by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) and represent people who die from COVID-19, as decided by the clinician registering the death. This measure provides a less rapid but more accurate measure of the burden of the disease over time and has been published on the gov.uk dashboard since 2020."