26-Nov 2022 : LAB: 50% / CON: 27% / LDEM: 9% / GRN: 4%

[alec]

Posting this here for general info. It's from Paul Mainwood, mathematician with an interest in covid, and it's a graph showing remaining life expectancy. It helps to contextualize the usually wrong takes on early deaths from covid where minimizer people wrongly claim that the 'average age of death was above life expectancy'. Here we can see that if you are a woman of 80 years old, you can on average expect another ten years of life. It's flawed applying the average life expectancy to an individual of any given age, because that isn't how life expectancy works. For reference, in the first wave, the average loss of life for each covid death was seven years, which is rather a lot.

[superted]

Mar 23, 2023 0:21:35 GMT oldnat said:

Mar 22, 2023 23:58:16 GMT superted said:

Peston had an Opinium poll with a lab lead of 12 with Sunak as leader but 11 with Johnson as leader. Not sure of exact questions but may not be 100% directly comparable to standard Lab/Con question if they specified the leader more than they would do in a normal poll.

Without seeing the details of the poll, that apparent difference looks to be fairly meaningless. Did a few more Tory voters move from DK to Con if Johnson were their leader and shift the rounded %s from X+O.49 to X+0.51 and vice versa?

Can say that about most polls though where there are small differences. Have thought before that, due to rounding, a party being +1 in a poll could be +0.1 (say 35.45 to 35.55) or +1.9 (34.55 to 36.45), so not sure why you pick on this poll.

If its due to the extra mention of party leader possibly causing a small difference then I think that is still valid.

Be briefly interesting to see if there is a further breakdown of how the con vote varies between them although at present Johnson becoming con party leader before the next election looks an unlikely prospect IMO.

[steve]

During lockdown my mother's dementia deteriorated rapidly and she ceased to be the woman I knew, she remained locked up in her sheltered housing with the other fifteen elderly residents for the best part of a year.
Fortunately none caught covid but three died during lockdown anyway and were removed to unattended funerals.

If only the lied piper had let us know it was ok to" say goodbye to someone who was leaving" by a mass gathering we might have been able to say our farewells while she knew who we fucking were!

[steve]

alec
That graph doesn't prove what you think it proves it just indicates that at any given age between 80 and 90 you are more likely than not to live a while longer.

It's certain that covid terminated some people's lives earlier than would have been the case for them individually this is applicable for all age cohorts, however protection from exposure to viruses might have had the reverse impact, for example the number of geriatric deaths from flu related conditions fell. Overall it's had marginal impact on average life expectancy which indicates that not many more people than normal were dying each year after the average age of death.

This doesn't of course impact  that individual deaths might have been felt as a great personal loss to friends and family.

[barbara]

Mar 22, 2023 22:40:14 GMT mercian said:

Mar 22, 2023 22:30:50 GMT steamdrivenandy said:

I agree that after a while the rules seemed to become a blur, but Johnson was agreeing them, announcing them and promoting them. So either he didn't understand what he was agreeing and/or saying or he thought they didn't apply to him. Neither of those options are a defensible position for a PM.

If it's true that they were having these regular jollies at the time when only 2 or 6 people could attend a funeral it's very bad and Johnson should have seen that. Also though, I don't suppose he personally organised them and if he didn't then heads should roll in the Civil Service too.

 I find it ironic that Trump and Johnson were so similar in some ways and are being brought down at the same time. They both have silly hair, are not traditional politician types but have the ability the enthuse a lot of voters.  It points up the difference between the USA and us that Trump is being pursued for fomenting armed insurrection amongst other things, whereas Johnson is brought down by going to a party and being economical with the truth.  😃

The other similarity is that apart from the cultists most people have seen through their narcissistic, self serving personalities and most of those who initially supported them are embarrassed and regretful. The polls show this. .....you can fool all of the  people some of the time....

[barbara]

Mar 22, 2023 23:09:32 GMT steve said:

Daily question from yougov
Is Spaffer Honest or Dishonest

Honest 13%
Dishonest 72%

What are the 13% on?

Cultists.

[pjw1961]

Mar 22, 2023 23:50:02 GMT mercian said:

Just one local by-election tomorrow - North Northamptonshire, Rushden South. It would be a major surprise if Tories lost. In 2021 3 councillors were elected, all Tories. The lowest polled about twice the best Labour vote. They don't count until Friday.

In the spirit of UKPR2 pedantry, there are actually two others - but they are those weird City of London ones, with tiny electorate, bizarre voting rules and where most people stand as independents regardless of their actual views.

Reading on the background to one of those by-elections it seems like the City of London authority is dominated by a clique of middle-aged men who all happen to be masons and are given to systematic bullying, especially of 'uppity' women who don't know their place. Can't say I'm exactly shocked. 

[alec]

steve - "Overall it's had marginal impact on average life expectancy which indicates that not many more people than normal were dying each year after the average age of death."

Sorry Steve, but that's complete bunkum.

Life expectancy generally changes slowly from year to year. Covid has had a huge impact. You've got this wrong.

[pjw1961]

The Daily Torygraph has as its secondary headline: "The cults of Boris and Brexit are simultaneously imploding."

Bit galling for those of us who never fell for either in the first place.

[bardin1]

Mar 23, 2023 8:29:36 GMT pjw1961 said:

The Daily Torygraph has as its secondary headline: "The cults of Boris and Brexit are simultaneously imploding."

Bit galling for those of us who never fell for either in the first place.

Must be nice to be an objective journal which can take a reasoned view of this and report the truth rather than one of those who told readers to get behind Brexit and its lying leader - oh wait

[steve]

alec
If you wish to talk further about this the covid thread is appropriate, where it should have been in the first place.

The kings fund shows a not surprising fall in life expectancy in 2020-21 but no significant impact otherwise.

www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/whats-happening-life-expectancy-england?gclid=Cj0KCQjw8e-gBhD0ARIsAJiDsaWgK8QtGVWrHdytbELD3tOCjkF9WPpOgsIPBBbCn2z673T8SsRzb9YaAmWkEALw_wcB


Covid thread now please don't want to bore everyone.

[pjw1961]

Mar 23, 2023 8:27:41 GMT alec said:

steve - "Overall it's had marginal impact on average life expectancy which indicates that not many more people than normal were dying each year after the average age of death."

Sorry Steve, but that's complete bunkum.

Life expectancy generally changes slowly from year to year. Covid has had a huge impact. You've got this wrong.

Alec is correct that Covid caused a substantial drop in life expectancy 2019-2021. And those who wish to point to coalition/Tory austerity also have a point. The increases in life expectancy which had been accruing steadily for decades halted in 2011 and have not returned. Two things can be true at once - indeed they are likely connected as Covid hit an already unhealthy and stressed population that was more vulnerable as a result. As the Kings Fund shows the death rates from Covid were much higher in certain groups than others, with social deprivation being one major factor.

 www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/whats-happening-life-expectancy-england?gclid=Cj0KCQjw8e-gBhD0ARIsAJiDsaUuyr8n4BmgqKLPmbKkuNYuS9eh5BMnjXDlWDv5ukfQAWbBbIxCXbMaAlw5EALw_wcB




 
 

[steve]

pjw1961

He is indeed correct for 2020-21 however overall impact other than at the peak death rate period is marginal.

Covid has had a temporary impact the Tories will always be bad for your health.

[alec]

pjw1961 - the only additional point I would make is your use of the past tense. These reduction in life expectancy in certain groups look like being permanent, because of continued covid impacts. Given what we now know of immune system dysfunction post infection and the increasing risk from subsequent infections, we may even see further significant falls in life expectancy. As you say, there is an equity aspect here, as these burdens are likely to fall on the less well off.

And you say, it is also completely true that we had lost much of the trend growth in life expectancy before the pandemic, which is a sad indictment of governance since 2010. We almost certainly had worse pandemic outcomes because of this too.

[alec]

The US legal system often gets a bad press, justifiably, but there are also some stunning examples of how people's rights and protections can be enhanced by the operation of a fierce and highly active legal system. This thread details how a group of care home managers are now facing felony charges because they admitted a covid infected patient without due regard to the safety of residents and staff, causing dozens of infections and 14 deaths. This will, without question, ensure that in the US, care homes are run much more effectively in terms of controlling covid. This kind of case would never happen in the UK - the best we might get is some litigation under the Health and safety act, but if the managers of facilities could face criminal charges for causing death by infection, it would work to greatly enhance our protection as individuals.

Thread here -

[bardin1]

Well I have been saying for the last ten years that the idea that life expectancy in the UK would continue to rise rather than fall was bizarre, given the rise in obesity. it just didn't make sense. The reason I was so exercised (sic) by this is that I was responsible for leisure, with associated health targets in an area of London at the time of the Olympics and we had targets for exercise and reviewed obesity levels etc and the stats were all heading in the wrong direction. So I believe that may also be a factor. Nothing to do with polling , however.

[Mr Poppy]

Good news for Wales and a sign that Rishi is working constructively Drakeford and Welsh Gov. 

Wales freeports for Milford Haven-Port Talbot, Anglesey
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-65044061

"Welsh ministers agreed to support freeports in Wales after the UK government agreed it would be based on a "partnership of equals" between the two governments"
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-62754343

[Mr Poppy]

What next for DUP and their 'strike' in NI? I note UUP's comments - wisely focusing on the need for DUP to get back to work:

"“The vote on the Stormont brake has shown that the UK Government are moving on and that the DUP boycott has failed. "

It will be a while before we get new polling for NI and there wasn't much shift into the WF vote but now DUP are striking without purpose will we see more Unionist voters shift to thinking DUP needs to get back to work - or will UUP be given the opportunity to become 'the' Unionist party in NI with DUP+TUV fighting over a shrinking % of "no,no,no" types. The strike can't go on forever but Westminster can keep making laws for NI for as long as they have to, decisions that the majority in NI approve of.

?

[steve]

Today's news

Sunak is super rich and pays a lower rate of tax than very many people who actually work for a living, Spaffer is a habitual liar who seems to believe his own falsehoods, inflation is ballooning up to 14 per cent, interest rates are going to go up again, strange old men on the fascist wing of the Conservative Party are still voting for the impossible- a Brexit that works, the infrastructure is collapsing around us, Putin threatens to destroy the planet, the last U.S. President faces forty years in prison for organising a coup, but remains the GOP favourite candidate to stand again and the leader of HM Opposition continues in what often appears to be a deep coma.I


Everything is fine in our septic island kingdom.

[jimjam]

Trevor,

Yes UUP getting squeezed between the dogmatic DUP and the pragmatic Alliance; and are now at last trying to avoid the splinters in their backsides.

[jimjam]

Same for SDLP with even less room as SF not as dogmatic as DUP.

They (SDLP) have been more pragmatic than the UUP but the nationalist/republican side of the spectrum has shifted more towards 'the now' anyhow.

Plus they losing voters due to being equivocal on social issues and have an aging base as a result.

Beattie was decisive in shifting the UUP to a more progressive social stance and may pull some DUP supporters over time as a result.

Fear of letting SF in, though, is holding up the DUP support imo for now but I can see a sea change at some point (I hope so at least).

[pjw1961]

Mar 23, 2023 9:48:13 GMT steve said:

Today's news

Sunak is super rich and pays a lower rate of tax than very many people who actually work for a living, Spaffer is a habitual liar who seems to believe his own falsehoods, inflation is ballooning up to 14 per cent, interest rates are going to go up again, strange old men on the fascist wing of the Conservative Party are still voting for the impossible- a Brexit that works, the infrastructure is collapsing around us, Putin threatens to destroy the planet, the last U.S. President faces forty years in prison for organising a coup, but remains the GOP favourite candidate to stand again and the leader of HM Opposition continues in what often appears to be a deep coma.I


Everything is fine in our septic island kingdom.

You forgot this;

www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/20/ipcc-climate-crisis-report-delivers-final-warning-on-15c

[neilj]

Yougov, budget bounce...

[Danny]

Mar 23, 2023 7:12:58 GMT alec said:

Posting this here for general info. It's from Paul Mainwood, mathematician with an interest in covid, and it's a graph showing remaining life expectancy. It helps to contextualize the usually wrong takes on early deaths from covid where minimizer people wrongly claim that the 'average age of death was above life expectancy'.

You do love to continue spreading flawed or irrelvant information even after these problems have been pointed out. There must be a fancy word for answering a question by giving an answer which superficially seems relevant but actually does not address the issue.

The graph you post shows average life expectancy at a given age. People dying from covid did not have average life expectancy because they massively over represented people already sick. If you break down people at 60, some will live to 100 but others die in their 60s. The ones who survive to 100 are the ones, by and large, most healthy at 60. To make a proper estimate of life expectancy of a covid victim you need to determine their health adjusted life expectancy, not the population average.

Or put that another way, people living in care homes died massively more than those living in the community. If you had altzheimers already, your chances of dying were way higher. Not necessarily even because altzheimers makes you susceptible to covid, but because it already correlates with deteriorating health.

If you want to make a start on a corrected life expectancy, then I suggest you take the tabulated risk factors for covid, and estimate how these reduce your overall life expectancy too. Never forgetting that your chance of dying from covid doubles every 3-5 years older you are.

[steve]

Ho hum

Mark might as well close the covid thread as it's two main( only) contributors don't seem to want to use it.

Meanwhile I was thinking about Spaffer's lies while listening to James O'Brien.

I think he's on to something Spaffer appears to believe his own bollocks is incapable of thinking he could have made a mistake therefore he must be right and telling the truth even if by any objective measure he's a pathological liar.
Much like cultists brexitanians who look over the shambles caused by their stupidity but refuse to acknowledge it because it would imply they had been wrong and say it's going great.

The daily torygraph of all places had this analysis on today's front page.

[Rafwan]

Mar 22, 2023 18:39:07 GMT domjg said:

Mar 22, 2023 16:57:57 GMT Rafwan said:

OK, but I do think this is all wrong and has no basis in fact. A majority in the Commons is NOT undemocratic. And optics and Tory press will often be made to look bad. This can and should be faced down. Whoever picks up the baton and runs with it has the momentum; and by this token, a Tory minority gov would not have failed. All respect, but I think this is based on a good old British sense of fair play. (“The other chaps did pretty well; let them have go now”.) This often is an admirable sentiment, but here it is wholly misplaced; there really is far too much at stake.

I understand where you're coming from and if you've read a few of my posts you'll know the tory party is very high on my list of things to despise. You'll also know that I don't respect regulation breaking, 'advisory', 'direct democracy' referenda. Exercises in representative democracy like general elections are however (in my opinion) the main thing we have keeping us civilised and we need to treat them with great caution and respect. Look at the damage playing fast and loose with that idea has done in the US.

I ask you this: If, at the next election the tories under Sunak get 258 seats and Labour get 307 yet Sunak somehow manages to remain in power by allying with other parties (v unlikely I know but just as an example) do you think "ok fair enough" and accept that or do you (as I would) basically go mental and scream injustice?  

As with many things in politics (and life) if you do it to them it just makes it easier for them to do it to you, or others,  further down the road. 

Aha, yes. Ouch. If that happened I should certainly be furious and feel utterly cheated. My side would have lost. (My local team is West Ham United FC so these are feelings I am very familiar with.) But my rage would be contained by our political institutions, which are very robust (and definitely command the caution and respect you call for). I would not be trying to invade the metaphorical pitch. In the end I would accept it. 

I just think it is wrong if we become scared to do things because of what the Mail and Telegraph might say.

[Mr Poppy]

Mar 23, 2023 9:57:45 GMT jimjam said:

Same for SDLP with even less room as SF not as dogmatic as DUP.

They (SDLP) have been more pragmatic than the UUP but the nationalist/republican side of the spectrum has shifted more towards 'the now' anyhow.

Plus they losing voters due to being equivocal on social issues and have an aging base as a result.

Beattie was decisive in shifting the UUP to a more progressive social stance and may pull some DUP supporters over time as a result.

Fear of letting SF in, though, is holding up the DUP support imo for now but I can see a sea change at some point (I hope so at least).

I can't see SDLP threatening SF's dominance as 'the' nationalist/republican party in either power sharing in NI Assembly or in Westminster elections. Although there was a period in 2021 when SF and DUP were both loosing some VI to the 'lesser' parties on each side, with Alliance picking up increased VI from both sides, SF recovered well into Stormont elections in May'22. DUP recovered a bit but the Unionist side is now more divided - even if all three were against the NIP going into the Westminster vote yesterday. 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Northern_Ireland_Assembly_election#Opinion_polls

SF are hence likely to stay as the largest party as they have a more united nationalist/republican vote with the unionist side split 3ways. My guess is the split between UUP and DUP might become more distinct and that potentially causes internal problems within DUP (ie some might want to restore Stormont whilst others might want to stay on strike - although for what purpose now??).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_Northern_Ireland_Assembly_election#Opinion_polling

I can't see how staying on strike will help DUP but I do appreciate they don't want to be '2nd amongst equals' and are more worried about loosing VI to TUV than concern about UUP becoming 'the' Unionist party again. 

TBC but plenty that CON HMG can consider doing to resolve the Stormont issue in due course - although like the UUP then HH/CON HMG might want to wait until the next NI polling to see if there is any shift on the Unionist side. CON HMG are in no rush, given DUP have effectively given power to Westminster, but I doubt the 'strike' will last past GE'24.
 

[Mr Poppy]

Follow up on DUP v UUP. Lockhart (DUP MP) makes a valid point - but that is now past tense. DUP missed the opportunity to claim they were the ones who got the EC-EU to make concessions and they were the ones who unlocked a load of UK/US/etc investment into NI, achieved most of what they wanted and restored a govt in NI. Estimate of claiming a "win" for their tough stance they risk being seen as disgruntled losers, now fighting over a lost cause.

For UUP then they can claim the WF is not ideal but is an improvement (and cheekily say their approach won the concessions as they never 'rolled over'). They can continue to ask DUP why they are still on strike rather than representing NI unionists in Stormont.

?

[Danny]

Mar 23, 2023 8:27:41 GMT alec said:

steve - "Overall it's had marginal impact on average life expectancy which indicates that not many more people than normal were dying each year after the average age of death."

Sorry Steve, but that's complete bunkum. Life expectancy generally changes slowly from year to year. Covid has had a huge impact. You've got this wrong.

Do you have any actual figures on that? ONS have a page at www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/bulletins/nationallifetablesunitedkingdom/2018to2020

Which shows there was a long term trend of linearly rising life expectancy in the UK between about 1980 and 2010. The data only starts 1980, so dont know before that. About 2010 (anyone remember what happened then?) life expectancy rise slowed from about 2 extra years each decade passing, to about half a year extra every decade passing. On that basis the way the UK functioned 2010 to 2020 lost the uk 1.5 years life expectancy each. This may not of course be a real loss for everyone, it may be for example the old are especially affected whereas the young's life expectancy will be determined by circumstances around the time they rich the age they die.

I also note another stat saying annual number of deaths in the UK was falling up to 2011, but has been rising ever since. There is some data about that here www.statista.com/statistics/281488/number-of-deaths-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/ There was a minimum of deaths at about 550,000 a year in 1922, a maximum about 1976 of 670,000, a new minimum again around 550,000 in 2011, then a change to a sharp rise in deaths. There is also an interesting point of inflexion in 1997 which happens to coincide with a change in government from con to lab, where the admittedly already falling death rate noticeabley increased its rate of fall. Those changes coinciding with government changes in recent years might of course be coincidence. Or might not.

Another problem is that for a given risk of death at a given age, the proportion of the population at that age will affect the annual total. So as the  total number of people in the age group likely to die goes up or down, so will the death rate.  We have some very marked  uneven age distribution of population which isnt being corrected for.

So... the current block of conservative government cost those approaching death now approx 1.5 years life each.  Roughly that would be 1.5x 600,000 x 10 x 0.5 = 4.5 million life years. Or assuming this trend would have continued in the absence of covid, add another 3 years worth to that at 1.5 years each or 600,000x3 x 1.5= 2.5 million more life years, a total then of 7 million life years.

The ONS data seems to be only published up to and including 2020. In that year life expectancy dropped maybe 0.5 years. So roughly that would be 0.5x600,000= 300,000 life years.  The figures arent there for 2021,2022 so dont know what happened then. But it seems very likely this drop in age wil pop up again once covid is over because it relates to early deaths from the illness. Lets for now assume three years at the same rate, about 1 million life years.

So arguably, the conservative government has cost the Uk 7 million life years while covid only cost 1 million.

As i said above, this takes no account whether covid killed those most likely to die early anyway. I imagine the fall in life expectancy under con is due to cuts in NHS and other care services 2010 on, and similarly improvements under lab directly related to increasing funding from 1997.

[Danny]

Mar 23, 2023 8:57:46 GMT alec said:

pjw1961 - the only additional point I would make is your use of the past tense. These reduction in life expectancy in certain groups look like being permanent, because of continued covid impacts.

It really does not. The kings fund link above suggests life expectancy improved in 21 compared to 20. There is no reason to think that deaths due to immediate covid illness will be the same numerically as deaths from long term covid effects, in fact you would expect them to be different as they have different causes. We have no data on long term deaths from covid because you need to wait a long time to see what happens.

Mar 23, 2023 9:06:46 GMT alec said:

The US legal system often gets a bad press, justifiably, but there are also some stunning examples of how people's rights and protections can be enhanced by the operation of a fierce and highly active legal system. This thread details how a group of care home managers are now facing felony charges because they admitted a covid infected patient without due regard to the safety of residents and staff, causing dozens of infections and 14 deaths. This will, without question, ensure that in the US, care homes are run much more effectively in terms of controlling covid.

On the contrary, it will most probably result in wasted effort because we dont know what would have been a good strategy to protect the old, and we absolutely do not know whether it would be counter productive to apply such changes permanently. For example, a permanent policy of no visitors, including family, to people living in care homes.

The precautionary principle applied to covid management based upon the estimated worst case severity of the epidemic cost lives, it didnt save them. It grossly over estimated the risk and grossly over estimated the benefits of interventions.