# The comparative figures for deaths of people with Covid



## Brendan Burgess (16 Mar 2021)

An interesting release from the CSO here 









						Covid-19 one of the lowest causes of death in Ireland between June and September 2020
					

Birth, death and marriage rates lower overall than for equivalent period in 2019, CSO reports




					www.irishtimes.com
				




_There were 191 coronavirus deaths in Ireland between June and September last year out of a total of 7,111 deaths over those three months.

Greater causes of death between June and September of last year were cancer (2,356), followed by diseases of the circulatory system (1,964), dementia (348) and respiratory illness (333). Accidents accounted for 217 deaths, Alzheimer’s for 125, with 94 people taking their own lives._

That is a bit misleading, as that quarter was not a bad quarter for Covid deaths.  The last three months have accounted for half of the deaths from Covid.

We have had 4,500 deaths of people with Covid since the pandemic started. 

Do we have figures for excess deaths?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (16 Mar 2021)

FactFind: Has Covid-19 impacted the overall number of deaths in Ireland this year?
					

Deaths rose by 14.1% in the second quarter of 2020 compared to the same period in 2019.




					www.thejournal.ie
				




By the middle of last year, deaths were running around 13% higher than they would have been expected. 

Presumably, this will be a lot more when the third wave is taken into account.

Brendan


----------



## demoivre (17 Mar 2021)

Brendan Burgess said:


> We have had 4,500 deaths of people with Covid since the pandemic started.



From week 10, 2020 to week 10, 2021 we have had 385 deaths from Covid ie where the deceased had no underlying conditions.


----------



## RedOnion (17 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> From week 10, 2020 to week 10, 2021 we have had 385 deaths from Covid ie where the deceased had no underlying conditions.


Do you have a link to any official source behind this statement?


----------



## Purple (18 Mar 2021)

RedOnion said:


> Do you have a link to any official source behind this statement?


I presume it's based on the percentage of people who die who have underlying conditions.


----------



## demoivre (18 Mar 2021)

RedOnion said:


> Do you have a link to any official source behind this statement?





RedOnion said:


> Do you have a link to any official source behind this statement?


The relevant table is on page 25 in the Weekly Report on the Epidemiology of Covid 19 in Ireland

[broken link removed]


----------



## RedOnion (18 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> The relevant table is on page 25 in the Weekly Report on the Epidemiology of Covid 19 in Ireland


With respect,that does not support the statement you made "From week 10, 2020 to week 10, 2021 we have had 385 deaths from Covid"

You are asserting that those with an underlying condition didn't die from Covid, but from their underlying condition. You know, those very very rare illnesses that you never hear about, and usually kill people quickly, including:
Asthma
High blood pressure
Obesity
Being pregnant
Type 2 diabetes, etc...

32% of the Irish population live with a long term underlying condition.

To make statements like you did, you need better data.


----------



## Purple (18 Mar 2021)

RedOnion said:


> With respect,that does not support the statement you made "From week 10, 2020 to week 10, 2021 we have had 385 deaths from Covid"
> 
> You are asserting that those with an underlying condition didn't die from Covid, but from their underlying condition. You know, those very very rare illnesses that you never hear about, and usually kill people quickly, including:
> Asthma
> ...


I agree with you but with such a high median age of those who have died it is fair to say that many of them with underlying conditions were close to popping their clogs, Covid or not.


----------



## demoivre (18 Mar 2021)

RedOnion said:


> With respect,that does not support the statement you made "From week 10, 2020 to week 10, 2021 we have had 385 deaths from Covid"
> 
> You are asserting that those with an underlying condition didn't die from Covid, but from their underlying condition. You know, those very very rare illnesses that you never hear about, and usually kill people quickly, including:
> Asthma
> ...



No, you don't need better data to make the statement that I made, but you chose to misquote me. 
It is much more accurate to give the number of deaths without underlying conditions than the number with underlying conditions since people who have stage 4 cancer, COPD, heart failure etc, but show a positive PCR are recorded as Covid deaths. And most of them are in their 80s.

But sure aren't they telling us every day of the week that a positive PCR is a case of Covid, despite advisories from the WHO to not do so? A PCR test doesn't diagnose Covid19 which is a disease, but rather detects , with varying degrees of accuracy, the presence of sars cov 2.

While I'm not a Covid denier I'm becoming more cynical about the whole thing I have to say but that's what happens when NPHET were telling me the last time the pubs opened that a €9 bowl of chicken wings was more effective at containing sars cov 2 than patrons being required to show a negative rapid antigen test result before admission, the cost of which would be about the same.


----------



## Leo (18 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> NPHET were telling me the last time the pubs opened that a €9 bowl of chicken wings was more effective at containing sars cov 2 than patrons being required to show a negative rapid antigen test result before admission, the cost of which would be about the same.



Can you point to where they stated that?


----------



## Ceist Beag (18 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> While I'm not a Covid denier I'm becoming more cynical about the whole thing I have to say but that's what happens when NPHET were telling me the last time the pubs opened that a €9 bowl of chicken wings was more effective at containing sars cov 2 than patrons being required to show a negative rapid antigen test result before admission, the cost of which would be about the same.


That right there is spin and bears no resemblence to the actual facts.
The facts are that the NPHET guidance at that time was that restaurants could be operated in a manner that kept risk of Covid spread low.
The facts are that NPHET could not offer the same guidance for pubs.
This makes perfect sense to me as in a restaurant people sit at tables (that can be safely distanced from each other) but people in pubs invariably end up shoulder to shoulder at the bar.
The facts are that publicans found a loophole around this guidance by finding that if the serve a substantial meal this constitutes operating as a restaurant (they're good at finding loopholes are publicans).


----------



## demoivre (18 Mar 2021)

Leo said:


> Can you point to where they stated that?



Well they aren't always explicit in their direction, you have to read between the lines. They never told me that sex between two people from different households wasn't allowed any more either, but it isn't.

If it makes you feel any better replace "were telling me" in my post above with "seem to be telling me".


----------



## demoivre (18 Mar 2021)

Ceist Beag said:


> That right there is spin and bears no resemblence to the actual facts.
> The facts are that the NPHET guidance at that time was that restaurants could be operated in a manner that kept risk of Covid spread low.
> The facts are that NPHET could not offer the same guidance for pubs.
> This makes perfect sense to me as in a restaurant people sit at tables (that can be safely distanced from each other) but people in pubs invariably end up shoulder to shoulder at the bar.
> The facts are that publicans found a loophole around this guidance by finding that if the serve a substantial meal this constitutes operating as a restaurant (they're good at finding loopholes are publicans).


 Standing or sitting at the counter in pubs was prohibited. Seating at tables only was allowed with social distancing, the same as in restaurants. I think you should review the data for pubs, hotel,s restaurants B and Bs and examine their contribution to the spread of sars cov 2 for the last 6 months of 2020. Pubs were not drivers of the virus. 

If you want spin look no further than positive PCR  cases being labelled as cases of Covid -  wouldn't sound too good to hear "500 positive PCRS  today, 400 of them won't even have a sniffle".

Sadly this lunchtime I've just heard of another "Covid" death - 86 year old woman in hospital for 6 moths,  with multiple organ failure, double amputee as a result of complications, positive PCR swab last week . She'll be in the Covid death numbers tomorrow night.


----------



## Leo (18 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> Well they aren't always explicit in their direction, you have to read between the lines. They never told me that sex between two people from different households wasn't allowed any more either, but it isn't.
> 
> If it makes you feel any better replace "were telling me" in my post above with "seem to be telling me".



It'd make me feel better if you stopped crediting them with statements they simply didn't make. 

The initial advice was pubs should close as the movement and interaction patterns of people within that environment was considered very high-risk. Restaurants were considered lower risk as people were more spread out and didn't circulate as much within the space. With that the government decided to shut pubs, but allow restaurants to continue operation with some additional measures in place. The publican groups successfully lobbied the government that pubs operating as restaurants could be allowed to open so long as they operated a restaurant only model. 

The claim that they ever advised that having a meal made any environment safer is utter nonsense.


----------



## Leo (18 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> If you want spin look no further than positive PCR cases being labelled as cases of Covid - wouldn't sound too good to hear "500 positive PCRS today, 400 of them won't even have a sniffle".



What would you suggest someone with a positive PCR test be labeled? Do they have Covid or not?


----------



## RedOnion (18 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> Standing or sitting at the counter in pubs was prohibited. Seating at tables only was allowed with social distancing, the same as in restaurants. I think you should review the data for pubs, hotel,s restaurants B and Bs and examine their contribution to the spread of sars cov 2 for the last 6 months of 2020. Pubs were not drivers of the virus.


Sorry, but I have to call you on this BS!

There is no data to analyse, because it's not gathered. Most of the cases in pubs are documented as 'community transmission'. Unless you can identify which of the hundreds of close contacts in the pub you contracted it from, that's what it is.

I live in a rural area, and prohibited or not, people were floating around the pub as normal. One of the local pubs wasn't even serving food - technically he got around the rules because he owned the chipper in the same building as the pub, and people could order food if they wanted to. The week before Christmas, the owner along with his wife and daughter all tested positive. As did at least 20 people, that I'm personally aware of, who had been drinking in the pub. But no, you're probably right - they all contracted it somewhere else, and it's just a coincidence that the pub is the only thing they have in common.


----------



## demoivre (18 Mar 2021)

RedOnion said:


> Sorry, but I have to call you on this BS!
> 
> There is no data to analyse, because it's not gathered.



[broken link removed]



RedOnion said:


> I live in a rural area, and prohibited or not, people were floating around the pub as normal. One of the local pubs wasn't even serving food - technically he got around the rules because he owned the chipper in the same building as the pub, and people could order food if they wanted to. The week before Christmas, the owner along with his wife and daughter all tested positive. As did at least 20 people, that I'm personally aware of, who had been drinking in the pub. But no, you're probably right - they all contracted it somewhere else, and it's just a coincidence that the pub is the only thing they have in common.



n=1.  Does the data I linked to, and that you said wasn't gathered, support your view?


----------



## demoivre (18 Mar 2021)

Leo said:


> What would you suggest someone with a positive PCR test be labeled? Do they have Covid or not?


 I think the WHO advisories should be followed. A PCR test doesn't diagnose Covid19.


----------



## RedOnion (18 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> n=1. Does the data I linked to, and that you said wasn't gathered, support your view?


It's not gathered if people don't say they caught it in the pub. How would it be recorded, linked back, and therefore included in the 'outbreak' which is reported?


----------



## Leo (18 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> I think the WHO advisories should be followed. A PCR test doesn't diagnose Covid19.



Are you sourcing that information directly from the WHO or did you fall for the scams and misinformation doing the rounds on social media?


----------



## Leo (18 Mar 2021)

RedOnion said:


> It's not gathered if people don't say they caught it in the pub. How would it be recorded, linked back, and therefore included in the 'outbreak' which is reported?



The high numbers of cases in Cavan and elsewhere associated with GAA celebrations don't seem to be reflected either, possibly as the pubs were operating illegally and locals were unlikely to report those accurately. It's no secret that bars are high risk  studies confirm this. Bars the world over have been shown to be high-risk, it's hard to imagine that Irish bars could be safer with the more sociable culture that tends to characterise pubs here.


----------



## odyssey06 (18 Mar 2021)

If someone over 80 dies in a car crash, do we not count that in the annual road deaths total?
If someone over 80 is murdered, do we not count that in the annual toll of murder victims?

Even if we didn't count deaths from people over a certain age or with underlying conditions, nothing would change in terms of practical policy.
It might change how we look on league tables v other countries.

Look at the stats for ICU for median age of ICU admission, it is a lot lower than that of deaths from covid.
Some of those people have underlying conditions, so what? They have decades of life ahead of them.
Our health service is there for people with underlying conditions. This is a total red herring which changes nothing.

The actual deaths are only half the equation here.


----------



## Protocol (19 Mar 2021)

Note a point made by Seamus Coffey UCC this week.

That CSO quarterly data published this week is by *date of registration of death*, not by the *actual date of death*.


----------



## Purple (19 Mar 2021)

odyssey06 said:


> If someone over 80 dies in a car crash, do we not count that in the annual road deaths total?
> If someone over 80 is murdered, do we not count that in the annual toll of murder victims?


I think the point is that if an 80 year old with cancer is killed in a car crash they don't go into the cancer deaths statistics whereas if the 80 year old has Covid and dies in a car crash they do go into the Covid stats.
If the 80 year old is dying from cancer and they get Covid they go into the Covid deaths stats even though they were dying of cancer anyway and if they didn't have cancer they would have recovered from Covid. T'was the cancer what did them in, not the Covid. Putting them into the Covid deaths is a misreporting of their cause of death done to inflate the figures and sustain an atmosphere of fear in the general population. 
While I generally support the lockdown and the broader Public Safety policies we have adopted I'm strongly against that manipulation of the facts as a tool to sustain public support for those policies.


----------



## noproblem (19 Mar 2021)

Looking back at the original post and it seems to me that no one has come up with how many people have died from "only covid" related illness. I've seen the TV programmes, etc, on people with severe covid in the hospitals and am upset for their families, friends who couldn't say goodbye but as to how many people have died from it is still not known and I doubt it ever will be. Are there post mortems carried out on the people who die and have contracted covid? I know of people who got ill (not covid) and passed away after  having got covid in hospital. Their death was put down as a covid death. Surely this is wrong. I'd imagine thousands like me have experienced the same thing.


----------



## demoivre (19 Mar 2021)

Leo said:


> It'd make me feel better if you stopped crediting them with statements they simply didn't make.
> 
> The initial advice was pubs should close as the movement and interaction patterns of people within that environment was considered very high-risk. Restaurants were considered lower risk as people were more spread out and didn't circulate as much within the space. With that the government decided to shut pubs, but allow restaurants to continue operation with some additional measures in place. The publican groups successfully lobbied the government that pubs operating as restaurants could be allowed to open so long as they operated a restaurant only model.
> 
> The claim that they ever advised that having a meal made any environment safer is utter nonsense


The nonsense is believing that pubs serving food were operating only as restaurants.


----------



## demoivre (19 Mar 2021)

Leo said:


> The high numbers of cases in Cavan and elsewhere associated with GAA celebrations don't seem to be reflected either, possibly as the pubs were operating illegally and locals were unlikely to report those accurately. It's no secret that bars are high risk  studies confirm this. Bars the world over have been shown to be high-risk, it's hard to imagine that Irish bars could be safer with the more sociable culture that tends to characterise pubs here.





RedOnion said:


> It's not gathered if people don't say they caught it in the pub. How would it be recorded, linked back, and therefore included in the 'outbreak' which is reported?



The data I referred you to shows that outbreaks in private houses over the 5 month period absolutely dwarfs the *combined* outbreaks in pubs, hotels , cafes, guest houses and B and Bs .


----------



## demoivre (19 Mar 2021)

odyssey06 said:


> If someone over 80 dies in a car crash, do we not count that in the annual road deaths total?
> If someone over 80 is murdered, do we not count that in the annual toll of murder victims?
> 
> Even if we didn't count deaths from people over a certain age or with underlying conditions, nothing would change in terms of practical policy.
> ...



Never was a truer word said about this whole saga and isn't it absolutely extraordinary that there's little or no debate about the massive collateral damage of lockdowns that will be felt for years to come?

As for practical policy are you aware of any economy in the world that shows an overall improvement in public health where unemployment is rising?


----------



## Leo (19 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> The nonsense is believing that pubs serving food were operating only as restaurants.



I visited a couple who were operating well within the guidelines. Unfortunately many others didn't stick to those high standards with the inevitable result that all had to be closed, punishing those who were operating responsibly for the irresponsible bahaviour of others.


----------



## Purple (19 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> Never was a truer word said about this whole saga and isn't it absolutely extraordinary that there's little or no debate about the massive collateral damage of lockdowns that will be felt for years to come?
> 
> As for practical policy are you aware of any economy in the world that shows an overall improvement in public health where unemployment is rising?


It's easy to put a number on the rates of infection and deaths. It's much harder to quantify the collateral damage to education, mental health, the economy that pays for social services etc.


----------



## Leo (19 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> The data I referred you to shows that outbreaks in private houses over the 5 month period absolutely dwarfs the *combined* outbreaks in pubs, hotels , cafes, guest houses and B and Bs .



Imagine the state we'd be in if the pubs had been open!!


----------



## demoivre (19 Mar 2021)

> Looking back at the original post and it seems to me that no one has come up with how many people have died from "only covid" related illness



I gave that number in post 3 



> From week 10, 2020 to week 10, 2021 we have had 385 deaths from Covid ie where the deceased had no underlying conditions.


----------



## Leo (19 Mar 2021)

noproblem said:


> Looking back at the original post and it seems to me that no one has come up with how many people have died from "only covid" related illness.



More than 90% of deaths here have been aged 65 or over, so it's no surprise that deaths with no other factor are low given that more than 50% of the population aged over 65 have a diagnosed condition, and many more will be living with an undiagnosed condition.


----------



## RedOnion (19 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> The data I referred you to shows that outbreaks in private houses over the 5 month period absolutely dwarfs the *combined* outbreaks in pubs, hotels , cafes, guest houses and B and Bs .


But the data isn't being collected, so it can't be reported. Unless every case us traced back to its true source, they can't possibly report it correctly.

Have a look at this article from last September which might explain it for you.








						NPHET explains advice to close pubs and restaurants with few outbreaks | BreakingNews.ie
					

The professor said the capital’s high rate of community transmission likely had pubs and restaurants at its source




					www.breakingnews.ie
				




Outside of healthcare and residential home settings, unless positive cases are as a result of being a close contact in most cases they end up being reported as community or household transmission.


----------



## michaelm (19 Mar 2021)

It seems we know how may have died with Covid but not how many died of Covid.  The restrictions will have reduced the numbers dying of Covid but who knows whether that number will be be eclipsed by those dying from other causes due to missed/late diagnosis while the health service was otherwise scaled back.  I suspect that down the line the overall death figures for a three or five year period covering Covid years won't look much different from other such periods.  But the cost to the economy and general mental health (probably) will have been high.

We really should be adjusting the restrictions based on hospital bed and ICU capacity at this stage.  The number of positive tests is less important if majority are younger people who are less likely to require hospitalisation.


----------



## Purple (19 Mar 2021)

demoivre said:


> I gave that number in post 3


No, that's not accurate either as many people with underlying conditions are not in the process of dying from those conditions.
"Fat" and fat related conditions are the number one underlying condition that people have who die of Covid19. 
20,000 Americans die of Fat every month. Lots of those fat people are now dying of/with Covid19. How do we distinguish between the two?  It's not easy but there are clearly cases where people were dying anyway which are being lumped in with those who actually die of Covid19.


----------



## noproblem (19 Mar 2021)

One would wonder what the written media and Radio/TV were doing before Covid struck? Every day, every few minutes, every conversation and all totally convinced that their methodology is the right one. People out protesting and getting lambasted left right and centre. Are we going to look back at this in a few years time and say what a bunch of sheep we all were or are we going to be any further on at all with countries closing down every few months into the future and a way of life going to get turned upside down? The future with very little travel, same with socialising, etc. The way we're being told right now has no logic to it at all. All garden centres closed but buy all the garden stuff you want in supermarkets, pubs all closed but buy all the alcohol you want in supermarkets, clothes shops all closed but supermarkets are selling clothes. There's thousands flying away on holidays and nothing to stop anyone doing so. You can drive from Cork to Derry, Galway to Dublin and no problems either, just tell the Guards you're collecting a grandchild from your son/daughter to care for for a week or so, cyclists in groups doing 50km spins and not in 5k loops, sheebeens operating in an awful lot of places, coffee meet ups, parties, etc, etc, etc and not a lot being done to stop any of it. Is it any wonder people are fed up and getting angry?


----------



## Leo (19 Mar 2021)

michaelm said:


> It seems we know how may have died with Covid but not how many died of Covid.


Attempting to measure that would be nigh on impossible. Many of those recoded as Covid deaths with underlying conditions might well have survived another 20+ years. They would almost need to go case by case with autopsy level detail to try make an assessment of how much longer each person might have lived had they not contracted Covid. The cost of that exercise would be significant and it would have a high margin of error that would render it of little value.


----------



## michaelm (19 Mar 2021)

Leo said:


> Many of those recoded as Covid deaths with underlying conditions might well have survived another 20+ years.


For sure.  But probably not those over 80 nor those in care homes.  I'm not suggesting a forensic exercise to work out the number of actual 'from' Covid deaths, I'm just suggesting it's likely a small fraction of the 'with' Covid deaths . . and that we should now be applying/easing restrictions based on hospital bed/ICU availability.


----------



## Leo (19 Mar 2021)

michaelm said:


> For sure.  But probably not those over 80 nor those in care homes.  I'm not suggesting a forensic exercise to work out the number of actual 'from' Covid deaths, I'm just suggesting it's likely a small fraction of the 'with' Covid deaths . . and that we should now be applying/easing restrictions based on hospital bed/ICU availability.



The cases I know of would disagree with the assessment that their relatives were at death's door, some may well have been of course, and it's certainly true that not too many 80+ year olds live another 20+ years.

Prior to Covid we had 225 ICU beds, we now have 316. On March first, there were 31 adult beds available across the system, 8 hospitals had 0 availability, a further 9 had 1 bed available. Numbers beyond that mean bringing surge capacity online and that involves shutting down operating theatres. I'm really sick of lockdown, but those numbers don't make much of an argument for easing restrictions.


----------



## Purple (22 Mar 2021)

michaelm said:


> For sure.  But probably not those over 80 nor those in care homes.  I'm not suggesting a forensic exercise to work out the number of actual 'from' Covid deaths, I'm just suggesting it's likely a small fraction of the 'with' Covid deaths . . and that we should now be applying/easing restrictions based on hospital bed/ICU availability.


It's also hard to know the real infection trend since we are constantly changing our testing and track and trace system. It is fair to say that if we now have the same detected infection rates as last year then the real infection rate is far lower as we are testing and tracking much more now than we did then.


----------

