Fanciful Numbers From The Experts?

[Deskdiary]

Let's take it as read that 100k deaths to date is a lot, that The Daily Moan is a bit sensationalist, and that the name Professor Lockdown is a bit silly.

But...

With the rollout of the vaccine and the continued lockdown, isn't the suggestion of another 130k deaths a little bit fanciful?

This is a genuine question - unlike many on AB, I'm not an expert - far from it - but I do remember the "scenarios" that Whitty and the other one discussed in the Autumn that never even came close to being realised. They were scenarios, pretty bloody bleak scenarios, but nonetheless they shaped policy. Another scenario, of course, was that their numbers and graphs were way wide of the mark, which proved to be the case.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9228617/Boris-faces-Tory-demands-drop-curbs-amid-SAGE-warnings.html

[jim360]

@jno and woofgang 22:02 and 22:05 -- precisely. But it sadly seems that making warnings that are then averted makes people question the warnings all too easily.

The other problem is taking the particularly excessive figures out of context. Ferguson's first paper had a reference to around 550,000 deaths, but that was on the assumption of doing nothing at all and would count deaths between March 2020 and March 2022; and that this would at least halve with mitigation, but again over the same time period. In that sense, we are sadly still within reach some of the worst-case scenarios envisaged by that paper -- a chilling warning to those who still refuse to take it seriously.

[Deskdiary]

Like I say, I’m not an expert like others, like jno, but I’m willing to bet that there won’t be an additional 130,000 people dead OF (rather than with) this disease.

[jim360]

The deciding factor one way or another will be whether or not there's a third wave in or around Autumn/Winter this year. I would like to think that's unlikely, especially given the vaccine.

[bluemoon1]

A lot will be discovered in the coming years. If, as I expect there is a slight jump in the number of deaths in 2020/21 followed by a slump in the following years, then the whole thing will have proved to have been a fiasco. This will show that many people who would have died in the following years have died a bit sooner due to the virus.

[jim360]

If you wait long enough, of course they'd all have died anyway. When, then, is the cut-off point before it starts to matter?

[bluemoon1]

There is a graph here that shows what I mean, I don't know what happened in 1980?

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/2020-set-to-have-highest-death-toll-since-world-war-1-131709798.html

[davebro]

"I don't know what happened in 1980?"

A guess - the increase to 1980 (& subsequent decline) was gradual, could it be elf & safety - anti-smoking lobby, heart disease awareness,
seat belts, other? dunno