One of the most reliable and informative sources of mortality data over the past year has been the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries’ weekly mortality monitor report. It shows weekly and cumulative mortality for the year, and unlike the ONS, adjusts for population size and age so we get a truer reflection of how the current trends compare with the past.
Last week the report showed that the trend of deaths in 2021 has been so low since mid-March that all the excess deaths in January and February had been almost cancelled out and cumulative standardised mortality stood at just 1.1% above the 10-year average (see graph below).
At Lockdown Sceptics we were waiting for the moment when, at some point in the next few weeks, this figure would hit 0% so we could announce that, despite the winter Covid surge, 2021 was now officially a low mortality year with below average age-standardised mortality.
However, it appears that moment now may never come, as unexpectedly this week the Institute changed the baseline on its key chart. The 10-year baseline is gone, and in its place is a straight comparison to 2019.
The important thing to know about 2019 is it is the year with the lowest age-standardised mortality ever (see below).
So now, rather than mortality in 2021 being around 1% above the 10-year average, it is suddenly “4.6% above 2019” (see graph below). The 10-year average line is gone completely so no comparison can be made with it at all.
This major change in baseline – which is a big deal when producing statistics for keeping track of trends – is not acknowledged. A sign that the change may have been made without due care can perhaps be seen in the stray “the” left in the heading from when it was edited, so that in place of “compared to the 2011-2020 average” it reads “compared to the 2019”.
The only explanation we are given is: “We use 2019 as the comparator as this is consistent with the excess deaths calculation above.” It’s true that throughout the pandemic period the mortality monitor team have used 2019 for their excess deaths calculation, yet nonetheless they’ve used the 10-year average in the cumulative mortality chart. Why the sudden change? If they wanted now to show the cumulative trends relative to 2019, why not produce charts showing both?
It is frustrating that this change has been made just as their figures were poised to show 2021 heading into negative territory compared to the 10-year average. Even more frustrating is that the baseline is now the least deadly year in history.
They explain in previous reports that they use 2019 for their excess death calculation because they consider it to be the most accurate comparator for deaths “in the absence of a pandemic”, since “2019 and 2020 had similar mortality experience for weeks one to 12”. However, that doesn’t allow for the fact that 2019 was anomalously low even for recent years, not least because of a very mild winter flu season. It also doesn’t explain why they have suddenly changed the baseline in one of their key charts, making it impossible to continue keeping track of the trend against the last decade.
Lockdown Sceptics has contacted the Institute to query the reasons for the change and ask for the original baseline to be reinstated. I will update this post if we get a reply.
UPDATE: The Institute and Faculty of Actuaries (IFA) has responded to our enquiry and said: “The CMI [Continuous Mortality Investigation] has added the rationale for the change to Chart 3 to its website.” They add: “The CMI intends to continue to use the version of the chart relative to the 10-year average in its quarterly mortality monitors, the next of which is due on July 13th 2021.” So we’ll have to wait until mid-July to get an update against the 10-year average.
In their explanation they say:
We recently became aware that some commentators were treating the 10-year average as a benchmark for current mortality, or indeed the CMI’s implied view of what mortality rates would have been in 2020 and 2021 if the pandemic had not occurred. This is not the case. Age-standardised mortality rates tend to reduce over time, and mortality rates in 2020 and 2021 would very likely have been below the 10-year average in the absence of the pandemic.
This raises the question of why they were including the 10-year average at all if not as a kind of benchmark, and why they continue to use it in their quarterly reports if it is so misleading. Their rationale is also incorrect. Looking at the chart of age-standardised mortality above, it’s clear that while the rate declined until 2011, since then it has been largely flat, and 2019 was unusually low. This means the assumption that 2020 and 2021 would, in the absence of pandemic, have resumed decline, rather than potentially see an uptick following a mild year, has no basis. Furthermore, 2020 was obviously not the first year in history to see a pandemic, yet after previous pandemics age-standardised mortality continued its long term decline (despite not having vaccines). The mistaken assumption that pandemics are anomalous rather than part of the normal (if irregular) ebb and flow of annual morality – as though they should therefore be excluded from trends and baselines – is exactly the kind of historically blinkered thinking that got us into this mess. This change from the IFA only reinforces that erroneous strand of thinking.
Here’s their response in full:
This note describes the rationale for a change in the format of Chart 3 of the summary pandemic mortality monitor, with effect from week 19 of 2021.
Chart 3 of the week 19 monitor shows mortality rates compared to 2019. This is consistent with the calculation of excess deaths in the pandemic mortality monitor.
Previous versions of the pandemic mortality monitor, showed rates relative to an average of the previous 10 complete calendar years. This is consistent with the regular quarterly mortality monitors we have produced since Q4 of 2018.
We consider the choice of comparator in this chart to be relatively unimportant, as the aim of the chart is to allow comparisons between cumulative standardised mortality rates in different years. The use of relative rates makes that comparison easier. We have shown the current year and each of the last 10 years, compared against the average of those 10 years. This results in charts that allow the relative mortality for each year to be seen clearly.
We recently became aware that some commentators were treating the 10-year average as a benchmark for current mortality, or indeed the CMI’s implied view of what mortality rates would have been in 2020 and 2021 if the pandemic had not occurred. This is not the case. Age-standardised mortality rates tend to reduce over time, and mortality rates in 2020 and 2021 would very likely have been below the 10-year average in the absence of the pandemic. This is especially true for 2021, as the 10-year average includes the exceptional mortality since the second quarter of 2020.
As our pandemic monitors are aimed at users who wish to understand how mortality during the pandemic compares to what might otherwise have been expected, we are now showing how the current year and each recent year compares to 2019.
As we have noted since the start of the pandemic, mortality in the first 12 weeks of 2020 was similar to mortality in the first 12 weeks of 2019, so we regard mortality in 2019 as a better benchmark of “normal” mortality. Changing the format of Chart 3 means that it is now consistent with the calculation of excess deaths in the pandemic mortality monitor.
We intend to continue to use the version of the chart relative to the 10-year average in our quarterly mortality monitors, the next of which is due on July 13th 2021.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Most so called journalists are either establishment lefties or they know which side their bread is buttered
Name some journalists who dug into the folly and evil that was “covid”. Toby Young, Peter Hitchens.
And how many had the stones to speak up for Julian Assange. They are a bunch of pathetic little worms who should change their career.
Good point. Hitchens banged on about Assange.
Allison Pearson and Liam Halligan at the DT were pretty sound ….. after the first few weeks when the DT was just promoting the propaganda.
Good to know. Precious few though.
Watergate couldn’t happen anymore. Most journalists seem to work in their pyjamas.
Watergate was an op. The reporters were useful idiots.
All true and beautifully articulated.
And yet 9m electors voted for this dangerous and entirely well-established bullshit.
We are screwed.
Well said. We have a uniparty state and millions of people who should know better voted for more of the same. Anyone who starts grumbling to me about the state of our nation under assault I first stop them and ask how they voted. If they admit voting for the Uniparty then I politely tell them they have only themselves to blame and they are part of the problem.
Probably people voted for the Uniparty because the available alternatives were perceived rightly as useless.
If it is your view that the alternatives are useless then perhaps, all things considered it is safer to vote for an alternative that is useless than any of the establishment parties who are committed to Net Zero economic chaos, wokery/transgenderism, the pursuit of critical race theory, the sexualisation of children, white population replacement, creeping back into the EU, courting war with Russia, the WEF agendas and further erosion of the nation state via cooperation and commitment to global NGOs.
Because a) the media are just loudspeakers for Government broadcasts; b) the media has got the Left-wing, authoritarian regime it desires, which is doing its best to shut down the media’s annoying, dangerous rival… the Internet.
This isn’t exactly news or surprising given that journalists did this through the entire Scamdemic, because they’re all bought and paid for establishment mouthpiece hacks.
Anyway, as regards to the two-tier justice situation, why didn’t this nutter go to jail because he’s a ‘terrorist’ based on this obvious demonstration of misogyny? Seriously though, is this ‘misogyny=terrorism’ supposed new law even a ‘thing’? Just send the guy down for assaulting three people, who happen to be women in this incident. But he’s Muslim so he got a suspended sentence instead. But if this is what he’s like in public ( a bit like the Nandos psycho hitting the waitress ) what on earth is he like behind closed doors? It seems to come a bit too free and easy to some when you see how comfortable and confident they are in attacking females. Almost like they know full well they’ll only get a slap on the wrist at worst….Yvette Cooper, take note. ( She will not. )
BTW, can anyone explain what the point of suspended sentences are? I literally don’t see the logic. You’ve either broken the law or you haven’t, which carries a jail sentence or it doesn’t. White people are being sent to jail for literally doing the opposite to this guy and NOT attacking/hurting anyone yet he walks?
”A man berated three women “prostitutes” for not wearing traditional Asian dress and putting on make-up, then violently attacked them, a court heard.
Muhammad Hassan, 26, assaulted the victims after spotting them at a petrol station in Bradford.
In a 51-second attack captured on CCTV, Hassan grabbed the driver and slammed her head on to the dashboard of her vehicle.
He then grabbed another woman’s hair and punched her in the head before hitting the third woman.
Hassan, from Bradford, was sentenced to six months in prison, suspended for two years.
Ayman Khokhar, prosecuting, told Bradford Crown Court Hassan knew the three women.
The group had stopped for fuel at the Prince of Wales Service Station on Harrogate Road while on their way to a dinner on May 25.
Hassan pulled up alongside the women and appeared to be “refuelling his car slowly on purpose”, the court heard.
The women decided to wait until he had left before getting out of their vehicle as Hassan had previously objected to their non-traditional dress and make-up.
He called them “slags” and “prostitutes” and demanded that they dress conservatively, the court heard.
After paying for his fuel, Hassan marched to the women’s car and punched and pushed them before driving off while the women called 999.
The victims suffered swelling, bruises, red marks and scratches.”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/man-assaulted-three-asian-women-175956196.html
Isn’t it just one additional step before a custodial sentence? Sort of like a last warning?
I think the above article just illustrates the two-tier justice the UK is experiencing perfectly. It’s all completely mental. Don’t attack somebody, you’re off to prison because you shared a meme or went to a protest and shouted at police/a dog. Attack somebody, you get to avoid prison altogether, just do a bit community service and keep your nose clean. That must surely reassure the victims that you’ve traumatized. It also makes Yvette Cooper look like a total idiot because the world and their dog can see that this entire ‘misogyny’ lark is all about curtailing free speech further. We don’t need any extra laws, just the ones that exist to be implemented appropriately, which is clearly not happening.
Meanwhile, Laurence Fox has the remedy for the above triggered douchebag and his ilk. I had to laugh at one reply: ”Close your eyes and think of Diane Abbot”
https://x.com/LozzaFox/status/1828762903249400263
Couldn’t agree more.
We.could probably even get rid of quite a few.
It means if you reoffend – for anything – you go to gaol to serve the original suspended sentence plus whatever new sentence is imposed.
It is supposed to encourage you to be a good boy.
Still, not much justice for those women he attacked!
I would like to know what the sentence would have been if the assailant had not been a Muslim.
I’m guessing that it would not have been suspended (and the criminal would be having seven bells kicked out of him in prison).
It just seems to me that the UK law is fluid, which basically means it isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.
Meanwhile, speaking of the dratted Yvette Cooper and Labour government. I think they’re going to have to recruit more police;
”The Home Secretary is understood to be considering a new “zero-tolerance” approach, which would see police officers encouraged to record more non-criminal hate incidents.
The move would be a reversal of changes to the laws brought in last year by the Tories, who issued new guidance that ordered the force to stop recording incidents just because someone was offended.
Coming into effect in June 2023, officers are currently restricted to only recording incidents motivated by “intentional hostility” and “where there is a “real risk of escalation causing significant harm or a criminal offence”.
The changes were implemented in a bid to preserve free speech after concerns were raised it was being curtailed.
One “trivial” case included a man accusing his neighbour of racial hatred after he whistled the Bob the Builder theme tune at him, whilst a student who was added to police files after scuffing a copy of the Quran caused Suella Braverman to act and implement the changes.”
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/yvette-cooper-considers-plans-to-bolster-hate-crime-laws-despite-fears-over-free-speech/ar-AA1pz3ZI
Of course if he wasn’t a Muslim he wouldn’t have done it in the first place.
Fair point. But if a white person did assault Asian ladies like that then it would have been viewed as a racist crime which seems to compound the felony by a significant factor, for reasons which escape me. Same as knife crime, not so much fuss made about black on black but if it’s white on black all hell let loose. Basically it is the ethnicity of the criminal which dictates all.
The whole George Floyd episode was based on racism but was there any evidence it was racially motivated when you consider that the Policeman and Floyd knew each other, and had ‘history’.
I’m sorry, but do people at the Daily Sceptic actually still believe the official press hold power to account at all? Really?
Here is a good rule of thumb. If you don’t want to be brainwashed by the establishment, stay the hell away from official media and journalists with credentials like Downing Street press passes.
You could hear Beth Rigby of SKY NEWS urging and imploring Starmer to rejoin the EU. She was desperate for him to give her the nod and the wink. But ofcourse he wasn’t going to give the “far right” any ammunition, so he just called it all “closer relations” etc. But you can see where this is going with Starmer stating “No, this is not about reversing Brexit”———–You total cretin, that is exactly what you want.
A side note: Chris Hope, from GBN, made the point that the “Rose Garden” did not have many roses in it. Only one rose bush, apparently – it was an invented name by someone relatively recently for whatever reason. Quite likely that the cameras used had wide angle lenses on to make it look larger than it is, as well. And he didn’t have the opportunity to ask anything.
He wasn’t selected to ask anything. This is why nobody asked any serious questions, Starmer invited only tame journalsits to speak.
Wow— they named it after the White House Rose Garden where US Presidents often give speeches to the media. It’s the same kind of unnecessary imitation of the US Supreme Court, when the British Law Lords were abolished and replaced by a newly-invented British Supreme Court, which has been busily practicing “Judicial Overreach” ever since then, just like its much older American counterpart.
There was definitely a pile of manure at the podium
Great article- thanks!
I’m thinking that comrade 2T S will be ‘protected’ from the hitherto normal rigours of robust public questioning. For political reasons of course. That said, I seriously doubt his personal ability or capacity to think on his feet.. I’m not precisely sure who said it but I think that as far as his substance goes ‘there’s less to him than meets the eye’!.
His speeches will be carefully crafted by ‘others’ and the behavioural insights language is easy to spot as is the ‘pre framing’.
Of course, the ludicrous ‘we’ve discovered that things are far worse than we thought’ will be appropriated to exonerate themselves from accusations of being dishonest with the electorate.
Despicable!
The only promise Labour made in the election campaign was for ‘change’ that ‘the country is crying out for’. People wanted the Torees out and they got what they were looking for – for ‘change’. Virtually no politics was discussed in the campaign and evidently none was required by the small percentage of people who actually did vote for ‘change’.
Thus, all these things are ‘change’. Increases in taxes are ‘change’ (and, indeed, not small change). Redesignating illegal migrants as ‘irregulars’ is ‘change’. Carpeting the countryside and the seas with windmills is ‘change’. Ceasing to heat pensioners while hotel guests are cosseted is a sort of ‘change’ that appears to recognise the wisdom of investing in those with a longer potential as possible taxpayers.
The British state dealing with lawbreakers (if only those who challenge its authority and who do not have community leaders or elders to negotiate with) with arrests and custodial sentences rather than with cautions and suspended sentences is ‘change’. While removing the instant ‘justice’ from shoplifters is an altogether different sort of change. A new treaty with Germany to help ‘working people’ is ‘change’ (though it must always be borne in mind that what Sir K means by ‘working people’ are those without savings).
Also nobody asked about a countrywide rollout of the 20mph when it is unpopular here in Wales. But as we know, consultations are part of the new fascism and sidestep ‘the people’. The modern ‘consultation’ and its conclusion are already decided.
Stärmer missed his true calling – as a de-motivational speaker…
Political Deception – ‘The act of politicking involving lies, self-presentation, promises, fabrications, and so on, to distract and keep people waiting for solutions in a political system’
KS – The Master Deceiver
Because if they upset 2TK, that would be the last time they ever got invited to the Rose Garden. They like having their place at the table.
Well done to David Craig for listing the questions most of the British People would like journalists to ask Starmer.
His article made me wonder why the media has gone all quiet about the jail sentences being handed out to British Patriots protesting against the Mass Importation of Muslim Men of Military Age, and the resultant horrific criminal acts immigrants have committed. So I tried doing a Google search, and found that the latest 3 British Patriots have been sentenced to prison for shouting, gesturing and lunging at police, and one for throwing stones, and one for also using a bicycle to shield himself from a police dog biting him, leaving him in a wheelchair. No police or dogs were actually harmed by any of those sentenced to 2 years and 3 months, 2 years and a 6-year criminal behaviour order, and 1 year and 8 months. Their humiliation was complete when their lawyers assured the court that the defendants were “thoroughly ashamed” or “utterly disgusted” with themselves, perhaps after telling the defendants that would get them a lighter sentence. It did not.
Hull riot: Three more troublemakers jailed after ‘miasma of madness’ in city centre – Hull Live (hulldailymail.co.uk)
“Campbell [now in a wheelchair from police dog bites] had six daughters and four grandchildren, who were the “light of his life”. He was in Hull to buy a suit for a funeral at the time of the disorder.”
Riot suspects warned ‘we will arrest you’ as police storm homes in morning raids – Teesside Live (gazettelive.co.uk)
“never in my 30 years’ service have I seen anything like that in Middlesbrough. What the community had to put up with that day was completely unacceptable.”
*Note that the English word “community” in the UK now means people with “community leaders” whose ancestral homeland is in the Third World, usually vast in comparison to the British Isles, and with no ancestral, ethnic or cultural connection to the British Isles.
Meanwhile,
UK: Muslim groups urge government to engage with Muslim Council of Britain after riots | Middle East Eye
“The declaration, issued by the recently formed Islamophobia Action Group on Wednesday, was signed by 80 organisations including the Muslim Engagement and Development Initiative, the Muslim Association of Britain and the Muslim Council of Wales.
It called on the government to “engage directly with legitimate, democratically elected representatives of Muslim communities, particularly the Muslim Council of Britain, to ensure that Muslim voices are heard and addressed”.”
To its enormous credit,
“The government did not respond to communications from the Muslim Council of Britain throughout the recent far-right riots.”
Long may that continue…
Well they can foxtrot Oscar for a start.
But just watch 2tk will cave, of course he will.
Useless fucker that he is.
Well, that’s a good question.
As far as I can see, during the Covid crisis the entire mass media became extremely compliant and unquestioning (that’s why I started reading the DS!) and afterwards never really returned to normal business.
It’s like some essential life-force has gone out of the entire journalistic business. The articles have become lazy, patronizing, banal; it’s like they assume that their target audience has become at least a little bit stupid.
Coupled with that I think it’s probably a waste of time to ask Starmer any questions. The guy is an empty suit. A machine programmed to spew out some stock phrases. Seriously, there is noone there.
Excellent piece as usual.
Still, looking on the bright side, his evident crookedness obvious even to normies must surely bring forward the day on which the worm will turn and we can kick these rascals out, and hopefully save something of the rather special even if not perfect country most of us were born and brought up in.
They don’t have any choice. Same in America when Kamala was annointed. Immediately the message was this is the person you need to support no matter what and of course the masses clap like seals. Just like they loved Johnson and Cameron and Blair. It is presented as the only option and your average joe stuffing his face with a Greggs sausage roll goes yep that’s the only option now leave me alone to enjoy my nasty pasty. You can’t do anything about these tendencies as lamentable as they are. It is a mucky business trying to turn that ship around.
I won’t hear a bad word said about the legendary and much revered Greggsy’s sausage roll, mind. All in moderation, of course, like all things. Anyways, won’t be long til I’m once again ”sittin’ in a sleazy snack bar suckin’ sickly sausage rolls” as I ”run for home, run as fast as I can, woooaaaah running, man. Running for home.”
To be fair, it was mostly the same set of journalists who were notable for their inability to ask the obvious questions during Covid, lockdowns and ‘cakegate’. Unlikely that any of them are going to win a Pulitzer, I’d wager…
There is so little money sloshing about now they will do anything to earm a few quid. Yes they are still scumbags but the world is full of such people. The fact that they call themselves journalists doesn’t mean that it is wise to listen to them. I understand the attraction of pretending to be naive but this is the wrong time to do it. We live in nasty cutthroat times. If you aren’t up to that challenge then reality will cut your throat.
Why?
Because most of them either support Labour, or want to keep their jobs and know that asking “difficult questions” would put them at risk …… or both.
REAL journalism no longer exists in the MSM.
It still persists to some degree on GB News and Talk Radio, but the alternative media, podcasters and citizen journalists are the only places where you’ll find something approaching real journalism.
And they’ll not be allowed within 100 metres of Keir Stalin.
Also TNT Radio News is doing a great job. Watch out for ex-BBC Journalist Jemma Cooper – she is excellent.
Great article. It occurred to me yesterday that the media can literally let politicians get away with murder.
Stalin wanted to show the World’s media how successful communism was and feted people like US journalist Durante to come to Moscow where he showcased happy citizens and a working society. Durante even went on to win a Pulitzer Prize for this.
While all the time Stalin was literally murdering millions all of which was kept hidden from the media. The film ‘Mr Jones’ is the story of one journalist who would not accept what he was told and travelled to Ukraine to see the horrific result of Stalin’s policies.
I suspect that today’s journalists are not only like Durante – who accepted what he was told, but are wilfully turning a blind eye to the obvious harms that the uni-party have inflicted on this country and refuse to report on anything coming near them or, God forbid, anything outside the official narrative.
I suspect that this winter stories of pensioners who have died as a direct result of no winter fuel payments will suffer the same fate as stories of the 1000s who lost their lives because of a certain medical procedure.
They are all guilty and complicit in this…. I despair of real truth ever getting out while people continue to get their news from these sycophantic liars.
Because they’re socialists
Thi swas an Orchestrated Circus…. So called journalists are just as good as Richard Burton’s Staff in 1984! Shameful…. what has happened to England!!
Same as the ‘journos’ who never questioned Nicola Sturgeon..too busy fawning over her while she trotted out the most awful lockdown restrictions on us Scots. Or droning on about Independence and the people of Scotland. A complete and shameless liar aided and abetted by gutless TV & Newspaper ‘investigative journalists’.