"Conservatives dismiss criticism of Poilievre’s $1,700 fundraising dinners"
So what you're saying is that we're about the same as other economies.
https://www.safec.ca/information-economic-indicators-g8-countries
my opinion is uninformed?
Since she's basing it solely on her lack of any relevant education or experience, and claiming her conclusions are more valid than those of experts, I think "uninformed" is a charitable way to characterize her opinions folks.
politicians make decisions based on advice from
other peopleexperts?
You know, people who - unlike you - know what they're talking about.
I'm a bit embarrassed for you that that needs to be spelled out.
you accuse people of having an
actualuninformed opinion
Fixed that for you.
The 28-day measure overstates covid deaths
Another unsupported opinion from ScoobyDoo folks.
And incorrect, as it happens.
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.
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.
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.
Two different ways of counting deaths will result in two different totals.
Not enough to matter folks.
ScoobyDoo thinks her lack of any relevant training or experience entitles her to dismiss the experts when they say "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. The UKHSA measure under-reported deaths at the very start of the pandemic prior to the scale up of community testing (March to April 2020). From January 2022, a marked uncoupling was observed corresponding with the emergence of the Omicron variant and widespread population immunity__.
While both measures remain useful, they serve different purposes. Death registrations are a reference for overall death toll from COVID-19 (along with excess mortality estimates) and the 28-day death measure is most useful as a rapid indicator of death following COVID-19 infection, with peak utility when a new variant emerges or during a new wave which requires timely monitoring of severity for public health purposes." https://khub.net/documents/135939561/338928724/comparison-of-COVID-19-mortality-measures-in-pandemic-response-England.pdf/1a7b24bd-8dc1-f135-eaf1-93a6bb7edb21
Politicians don’t tell me their strategies.
Folks, their strategies are based on the advice they get from the people who - unlike ScoobyDoo - understand the rationale behind the responses to pandemics that are described in those links she refuses to read.
She might be one of those "If I don't know it it's not important." people.
Exactly.
She then goes on to offer her personal opinions.
No studies.
No science.
She has no relevant training or background but she's confident she knows more than the people who do.
Everyone that died within 28 days of a covid infection was counted as a covid death.
It is ScoobyDoo's opinion that this 28 day measure was not a valid way of counting, even though it's explained in the UK Health Security Agency blog cited repeatedly earlier in the conversation that this 28 day measure was confirmed to be sufficiently accurate by subsequent clinical testing, which took 8 or 9 days longer to process.
ScoobyDoo does not acknowledge the clinical testing. Perhaps it is her inexpert opinion that it is invalid for some reason. We don't know. She says nothing about it.
At any rate, with the arrival of covid variants the 28 day measure became less accurate and it was eventually dropped.
ThisI think this post is correct in stating that covid deaths are inflated because I suspect that covid deaths are inflated
All she's got is an opinion folks.
The fact that the two tests methods were accurate enough until one was dropped because it wasn't doesn't make a dent in her awareness. She just knows she's being lied to.
Maybe ScoobyDoo thinks pandemic history started with covid folks.
Closures are a component of pandemic response planning, and their place in the protocol sequences would be clear to ScoobyDoo if she read the literature provided in the links above, but she chooses to ignore the history.
She might be one of those "If I don't know it it's not important." people.
deflect to something else
She's the one who brought up "misleading stats" in general folks, with her earlier link to a business article about "Techniques used to create misleading statistics.."
Maybe she forgot that, 'cause now she's pouting:
We were talking about a specific press release.
Exactly. And the numbers in it about pediatric admissions come from people with relevant expertise in over 200 New York State hospitals.
What peanut gallery pundits like tabloid journalists and anonymous social media impostors claim - without support, just "IMO" - doesn't really matter, does it?
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."