Colin Angus Profile picture
Sep 16, 2020 11 tweets 5 min read Read on X
Today @NatRecordsScot have released their first set of detailed mortality data for Scotland for a month.

Lots to unpick in here, but here's a few things I've noticed.

Firstly, deaths from all causes have been at the higher end of normal for a few weeks.
It *could be that this is just random noise - Scotland is a smaller country than England & Wales, so we'd expect the line to 'bounce around' a bit more. But 3 weeks is a bit of a coincidence, albeit it's not a long way above normal.
Some interesting age patterns - the 'bump' in recent weeks seems to be largely among 45-74 year olds.

It's also not likely to be anything to do with the heatwave-related mortality bump we've seen in England & Wales, since it's a good few weeks later. Also, Scotland is cold.
If we look at excess deaths by cause, it's clear that the recent bump isn't being driven by COVID-19 deaths. There doesn't seem to be any obvious pattern, though deaths from 'other' causes have been consistently above 'usual' levels for a few weeks.
If we look at *where* people in Scotland are dying, we see, in common with England & Wales, that deaths at home are well above historical levels.

It *looks* as though these are mostly displaced deaths from hospitals, but we can't be at all sure of that.
Finally, the really nice thing about this Scottish data is that we can look at deaths by cause *and* location.

So many interesting stories here. Hospital excess deaths were all COVID. Care homes excess deaths mostly COVID and demential/Alzhemiers.
It *looks* as though a key part of the story is a displacement of cancer deaths from hospital to home (although we don't know if they are actually the *same* deaths). For a long while it looked the same thing was happening with circulatory deaths, but seemingly not any longer.
It's also perhaps interesting that there have been a lot fewer respiratory deaths in hospital than usual, and these seemingly haven't shown up in other settings. But this 'deficit' has shrunk to almost nothing in recent weeks.
I'm not sure what this all tells us. The data probably invites at least as many questions as it answers, although those questions are at least more targeted. It's also not clear how much we'd expect the same things to be happening in the rest of the UK.

But it's fascinating
So all credit to @NatRecordsScot for publishing it, and I can't wait until we have some similar insight for the rest of the country.
Code for these various plots is here (1st plot):
github.com/VictimOfMaths/…
here (deaths by age): github.com/VictimOfMaths/…
and here (deaths by cause/location):
github.com/VictimOfMaths/…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Colin Angus

Colin Angus Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @VictimOfMaths

Mar 19
In Scotland, the GMB union have been vocal in calling for the proposed increase in the MUP threshold from 50p to 65p to be scrapped, on the basis that this is a 30% rise, while wages and disposable incomes have risen by barely 1% since 2018.

But wait...

gmbscotland.org.uk/newsroom/gmb-s…
...The 1% figure that GMB are citing is *after adjusting for inflation*. The latest data shows that household disposable incomes are 1.3% higher than they were at the start of 2018 in real terms.

But the MUP threshold hasn't been adjusted for inflation over the same period...
...50p in May 2018 when MUP was introduced is the same value in real terms as 62p today. So if GMB are arguing that the MUP threshold should rise at the same level as disposable incomes, then their logic means that Scottish Government would be increasing it to...
Read 5 tweets
Feb 28
OK, I read this and while there are some sensible points there is an awful lot of nonsense in here.

So here's a few things I'd like to address:
1) As I've already had a little rant, the attempt to dismiss the use of counterfactuals as "speculation" (but only in studies that show a benefit from MUP, they are fine in studies that find no benefit) is unbelievably dumb.

2) It is perfectly reasonable to highlight that many MUP studies have found little or no evidence of effect. However, it's daft to look across all studies and give them all equal importance. As the blog itself highlights - here are the original stated aims of MUP: Image
Read 18 tweets
Jun 27, 2023
Quite a few takes today on the evaluation of MUP which talk about it 'failing' or having 'mixed impacts', in spite of headline evaluation results showing it reduced alcohol consumption and deaths.

To some extent this reflects one challenge of such a comprehensive evaluation...
If the only studies that had been done were those on population level alcohol consumption and harm, you might reasonably claim on that basis that MUP had been an unqualified success.
But actually there have been 40 studies, including those commissioned by @P_H_S_Official and various independent pieces of work, looking at many different aspects of the impact of MUP.
Read 16 tweets
Feb 28, 2023
Our new paper looking at alcohol, drug and suicide mortality during the first 2 years of the pandemic in the USA and the UK nations has just been published in @RSPH_PUHE

Lots of attention on these deaths early in the pandemic, so what actually happened?

doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe… A screenshot of the title p...
We used publicly available mortality data to calculate age-standardised mortality rates for each cause and country from 2001-2021.

The shaded grey area represents the pandemic preiod.

Americans, look away now. A line chart showing annual...
In particular, many people made dire predictions that we'd see a big rise in deaths by suicide at the start of the pandemic. Thankfully these appear to have been misplaced. If anything, suicide rates *fell* in 2020. Line chart showing the same...
Read 18 tweets
Feb 13, 2023
Ugh. I have a lot of time for @IHME_UW but their consistent refusal to engage with reasonable criticism is disgraceful (@TheLancet don’t come out of this too well either, mind).

Full credit to @WHO for taking a more open and receptive approach.
@IHME_UW @TheLancet @WHO This refusal to engage with criticism is a depressingly recurring feature of IHME. Their COVID infection modelling repeatedly gave completely implausible results. They never publicly responded to people pointing this out, just quietly made (opaque) changes to their models...
...so the next set of results was less obviously wrong.

I've also had personal experiences of this. Last year IHME published a study (in The Lancet, where else) which did some interesting modelling, but fundamentally misinterpreted the results.
doi.org/10.1016/S0140-…
Read 11 tweets
Oct 18, 2022
In 2020, we saw a sharp increase in alcohol-specific deaths.

ONS haven't yet released their alcohol-specific deaths data for 2021, but I realised you can reconstruct the figures from data they have already published, and it's not good news, I'm afraid, a further 7.6% increase. Image
This represents the second largest single year increase in at least the past two decades, behind only last year.

Both men and women have seen alcohol-specific mortality rise sharply since the start of the pandemic. Image
Deaths have risen in almost all age groups, but most sharply in 45-59 year olds.

It's quite striking in this graph how deaths in these age groups were fairly stable pre-pandemic, while alcohol-specific mortality in older ages had been rising steadily for a decade or more. Image
Read 15 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(