The freak incident of a person dying from a car crash with COVID shouldn’t be treated as a COVID death.

However, if someone had complications like pneumonia and COVID and then died, I would say is fair to classify as a COVID death. I imagine most, if not all cases fall within this category (for Australia at least).

My other concern is the long term implications for those that recover since there are many reports of people developing respiratory issues. 

@pv4, interesting article FYI below:

Overall death rates are down - now the bad news

The coronavirus pandemic and its lockdowns have profoundly affected not only how we live, but also, how we die.

Official statistics and anecdotal evidence from health and funeral professionals and academics show the lockdowns have lowered the number of deaths from common causes including flu, motor vehicles and workplace accidents.Australian National University demographer Vladimir Canudas Romo said death rates were declining "in many areas", like road and workplace accidents, influenza-related diseases and infection complications."We might actually see life expectancy go up this year because social distancing is stopping other viruses from spreading," he said.

Imagine life expectancy going up during a really dangerous pandemic????


Above graph from the article is also really interesting as you can see the number of Covid cases verses seasonal flu, and mind you the flu numbers are grossly under reported as we have never done mass testing for flu like we have for Covid

https://www.smh.com.au/national/overall-death-rates-are-down-now-the-bad-news-20200821-p55nxm.html

From the ABS Stats referenced in the above article, check out the graph below:



what you can see is prior to the covid lockdowns, Aus death rate was trending above the 5 year average for the start of the year. Also note, for the big spike around end of March, there were on 4 Covid related deaths reported, so the big jump in overall deaths was due to other things.

With lock downs hitting in March, the death rate has been brought down during a period it normally increases (ie winter) and was actually the lowest in 5 years at end of May. If the pandemic was that bad, how is this possible?

https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/0E25B19FEA63D324CA25859000222EBD?Opendocument

Australia's first line of defence is mandatory quarantine. If it was voluntary quarantine we dont even need to speculate what would happen. Social distancing may be regulated everywhere but it is only enforced in public. Any strategy that depends on 100% voluntary compliance is doomed to fail. It was acknowledged that the behaviour in public was different to the behaviour in the comfort of one's home before this even became a problem. The tact was to lecture and plead people to do the right thing where as for other states it has been to use their rules to gently coerce people into making smart decisions

Secondly the numbers began to plateau at the end of July, before stage 4 was introduced. When you have a virus that spreads through linked households and work places then it can't grow forever. There are several reasons why we will see limits in the daily numbers. We know the initial postcode lockdown failed. We know the stage 3 Melbourne failed. And we know mandatory masks had no impact (14 days after their introduction was the peak of the outbreak and the worst recorded day). The role stage 4 had when the numbers were already on a downward trend are speculative at best. All we know is that they won't be in a manageable state after the 6 week stage 4 period has elapsed

As for risk of transmission in public, 99% of cases (I assume that means those investigated) can be linked back to the original outbreak. In order to link cases you need to definitively say "I caught this virus from that person". If you have caught the virus from a stranger in a public place then you can't definitively say where you were when you even got it, let alone who gave it to you. The stranger to stranger transmission is not zero, but it is still very low. It is a side effect of too many cases but not a cause. Also when it comes to defining a public space as a cluster it isnt solely based on the number of people with the virus who presented to the venue, its the number of people who contracted the virus at the venue. When public space is shut down often its because somebody who already has the virus has visited the venue, or works at the venue. Or the people are known to one another (as we see with wedding clusters - and we know large gatherings between known people are dangerous). Have a look at the long list of venues visited released every time there is a known case. If public transmission was high then you would see a trail of destruction, not a handful of cases with a speculative source

I also don't agree the numbers were too quick for contact tracing. Victoria had the highest rate of tests and they didnt start with 17,000 cases. They were acquired gradually over a long period of time beginning the Queen's birthday weekend. The problem was identified long before it became too much for tracers to manage. We knew exactly where it was, which regions were most impacted and how it was spreading. The solution simply didn't have an impact

Victoria's philosophy of continuous lockdown restrictions and minimising movement in the community has caused this virus to accelerate, not decrease.  If this was any other state we wouldn't have seen the same outcome. We know that because we have seen it with the same literal genome. When you have 25% of people moving through your community, your second line of defence is trusting that 75% of people will do the right thing

The thing we can all agree on about this virus is its going to be around for a long long time. Every state by now should have a clear road map on what is the new normal and how we go about the fundamentals of life (work, school, sport, recreation, and last social in a controlled way). I'd argue against travel but thats important to some people. Victoria hasn't done that. We don't know when we will be allowed back in the office. We don't know when we'll be allowed back at school. We don't know when we'll be allowed back on the sports field. The only thing we know is should prepare for some kind of mandatory mask rules in summer along with some level of lockdown restrictions

"The response rate varies each week, but usually delivers 1000+ interviews.  In theory, with a sample of this size, there is 95 per cent certainty that the results are within 3 percentage points of what they would be if the entire population had been polled. However, this assumes random sampling, which, because of non-response and less than 100% population coverage cannot be achieved in practice"

Funny thing is that they have, but selectively, ref below link

https://www.facebook.com/SkyNewsAustralia/posts/covid-19-deaths-classified-as-dying-from-coronavirus-rather-than-with-coronaviru/10157594260781728/

In Aus they arent going to shit on the mate ScoMo are they. Plus bad news is good news for traffic through news sites/shows (seriously, ask yourself how much more news content have you consumed during the pandemic compared to before?) so if your business model is struggling why not keep the gravy train going.

You are 100% correct Muz, so in Vic, despite a massive ramp up in Covid cases and deaths, total deaths in July 20 are 540 (10%) less than same time last year. despite there being 95 Covid related deaths reported in July 20.





https://www.bdm.vic.gov.au/research-and-family-history/research-and-data-services/death-statistics/deaths-registered-per-month

Incorrect, examples straight from the ABS website below. you will note that deadly diseases like heart disease or lymphoma are listed in Part 2 " Other significant conditions contributing to death but not related to the diseases or conditions causing it."

@Muz, as a follow up, from the UK Stats report posted earlier, ref below comment about overall mortality rates in UK:

The rate of deaths from all causes in June 2020 was 742.0 deaths per 100,000 persons in England and 837.5 deaths per 100,000 persons in Wales; both mortality rates were significantly lower than the five-year average (860.5 for England and 924.0 for Wales), though small increases in rates are expected over time as more deaths that occurred in June are registered.

This seems to show a pretty significant uptick in European countries.  https://www.bbc.com/news/health-53592881

Show evidence of said claim.

-PB

This analogy is old and lame, time to change it to hairy catterpillars.

-PB

Try reading this again. It exactly confirms my point. The person had a pre-existing chronic disease that did not cause their death. I have had a chronic disease since birth that I will live with hopefully for many years to come. However, if I get an ACUTE case of covid 19 that may cause my premature death. i.e the chronic disease makes you susceptible to the acute disease. No acute disease and you can have literally decades to live..

Not saying Covid hasnt claimed lives, but in your article below quote is quite interesting, why exclude countries with decreases?

So can a cold or flu or any other number of diseases

I guess the Vic CMO is lying then....

Victorian CMO explains death classifications

By Rachael Dexter

Australia’s deaths from coronavirus include people who may not have specifically died from the virus itself. Victoria’s Chief Health Officer has explained the practice, which is a standard set by the Commonwealth National Surveillance Committee and consistent across the country. “Anyone who’s a confirmed case who dies is classified amongst the deaths, so it doesn’t have to be definitely from coronavirus,” he said. “In some instances, you know in aged care, there would have been some residents who were already receiving palliative care who became infected with coronavirus”.

At 12.24 in below blog.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/coronavirus-updates-live-security-guard-contracts-virus-at-sydney-s-marriott-hotel-victoria-records-lowest-cases-in-a-month-australian-death-toll-stands-at-438-20200818-p55mxc.html

Exactly and if I die of flu the cause of death will be flu. This is an administrative form that is ensuring that all co-morbidities are captured so that future research will be able to done and lessons can be learnt where the cause of death is Covid-19. Nothing more - nothing less. 

We have literally altered people's lifestyles to combat and pre-empt it, is my understanding of how to answer your question. 

incorrect, flu is not as closely monitored as Covid is and so is not regularly reported as cause of death. Refer to below from Aus Dept of Health paper on flu monitoring and


8.2 National death registration data
Levels of influenza-related mortality can be estimated from national death registration data, compiled by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) from information provided by the state and territory Registrars of Births, Deaths and Marriages (BDM) and the National Coronial Information System. These data are coded using the ICD-10. An “underlying cause” of influenza and pneumonia (J10–J18) is utilised since mortality from a primary influenza infection is rare and most of the deaths attributed to influenza occur from complications including pneumonia, obstructive airway disease and sudden cardiac death.

https://www1.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/cda-surveil-ozflu-flucurr.htm/$File/Influenza-Surveillance-Systems-Paper.pdf

at what cost though..

“The predicted increase of suicides is 25 per cent each year for the next five years,” Professor Ian Hickie, co-director of the Brain and Mind Centre at The University of Sydney, said.

“That’s 750 extra deaths by suicide a year. It’s an enormous number. It will be a massively bigger death toll than COVID.”

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/the-silent-death-toll-of-covid19-revealed-huge-25-per-cent-jump-in-suicides-each-year/news-story/b4154626a16c9cc25c3b79b7880041ef

If those stats are to believed, the cost would be a 25% increase in suicide. Worth noting this is a prediction, against actual statistics. 

I am yet to fully conclude my judgement on how literal you take some figures and not others. 

We have also seen many predictions about Covid to justify the various actions taken by governments, how accurate are they?

For the death rate, the Vic CMO himself stated that not everything reported as a Covid death is directly related to Covid, so why doesnt the government provide a proper breakdown?

If life is so "precious" why dont governments ban all smoking, whose mortality rate in Aus is extraordinary and much higher than anything seen with Covid?

Tobacco use contributed to an estimated 21,000 deaths, or more than 1 in 8 fatalities, in Australia during 2015, according to a new report by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW).

https://www.aihw.gov.au/news-media/media-releases/2019/october/tobacco-use-linked-to-more-than-1-in-8-deaths-but

Doing this would require much less severe measures than what we are seeing with Covid and you would save 54 lives a day, versus the 25 per day Vic is currently seeing.

Let me reiterate, I am not denying Covid exists or is potentially deadly, I just question the actions taken by governments to try to combat it in the name of "preserving life" and the way they use dodgy statistics to justify their actions.

Wait, so you're saying you're upset that less people are dying from avoidable things like car crashes and workplace accidents??

But we're not in a pandemic of those flus or other diseases lol.

We're not locking down because of obesity of lung cancer from smoking ffs.

-PB

not sure where I said I was upset about people not dying, but good on you for that attempted troll, you should be proud!

Also it appears you dont understand the causality of people not driving and the reduced number of accidents? ditto with people not working and reduced number of workplace accidents. What do you think will happen when people return to work and start driving again?

why not though, surely something more draconian should be done to save the 21,000 lives lost every year due to smoking? or are you saying smokers lives are not as important as people who have covid?

For the most part, smoking is a choice. 

Most people do not have the luxury of simply choosing not to get COVID. 

I also bet there was a time limiting the sale of cigarrettes to over 18s was considered outrageous. 

I do understand the causality. I was just making sure you do, based off that article you posted.

Ding ding ding