Intensive Care Wards BBC News.

I do wonder just how many avoidable deaths are acceptable to some people.

Maybe people have to be scared into sticking to lockdown. And the only thing that really scares people is the possibility of death.

London has declared a state of emergency. This should allow the hospitals to get more help. They need it!

This was on this weeks Question Time.

twitter.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1346905003261374472

Regarding the scaremongering, here's a good example. Looks bad, doesn't it? More deaths recorded in a day than at the height of the pandemic in April. Except we have had four days this week with no deaths recorded at all and the average over 7 days is actually 36. The 7 day average in April often topped 50.

This is irresponsible sensationalism.

Why do you think deniers would believe what they see on TV? The BBC - and the other news agencies - are in the pay of the government, making it all up, remember?

But without showing covid wards how can we prove that the covid deniers are wrong. I don’t recall a situation before where lots of people are actually in denial about something as massive as this. And these people’s warped beliefs do have an effect on others. Ditto the anti vacc’ers ( who tend to be part of the same group).

Live Aid was 40 years ago and we'd never seen anything like it before. (Maybe Biafra.) I remember how shocked we all were when we saw the Michael Buerk report. You can only use shock value a couple of times and it gets diluted.

The truth needs to be reported. But nobody needs to see dead babies on the news at tea-time. Does me saying that offend anyone? Well it should, because that's what people who say "we need to see the truth" are saying. I think we have established that showing overwhelmed NHS staff and suffering patients on TV doesn't have any impact on the people perpetrating fake news, so what is the point of it? To remind us how awful things are? Well I think those of us who have any idea what's going on in the world already know that.

Nobody is burying their heads in the sand Call because we don't think putting this kind of thing on the news is wrong. I'd like to tell you about the Syrian refugee I met who had had family members die in the civil war; whose mother and brother were stuck in Syria with no hope of getting out; who told me that she could never go home again. That was distressing. I didn't need to see her dead relatives or hear the bombs drop.

When there is so much fake news and conspiracy theories swimming around on the internet, I think it is the right thing for eg the BBC to show the reality of what is happening in our hospitals.

The Chief Executive of NHS England said yesterday:
CLAIMS that hospitals are not under pressure from rising coronavirus cases are “nonsense”, according to the head of NHS England.

Sir Simon Stevens, NHS England chief executive, said people claiming the situation is a “hoax” are responsible for potentially changing behaviour which will kill people and are insulting to staff who have worked long shifts in the most demanding circumstances.

One of those members of staff is my DN who now has Covid.

I don't object at all to reports from war and disaster zones if they are actually reporting the news and not just showing dying children or distressed adults - that, in my opinion, is salacious. I know lots of people will disagree.

Why sanitise reports because it could upset someone's sensibilities? We need to know the truth of what is happening to people, to children when genocide is taking place in countries such as Syria. It's hardly ever on the news now but people are still suffering there.
People are distressed!

I don't agree with sensationalism, over-dramatising situations but the truth needs to be reported, even if it is uncomfortable to some.

If people want to hide their heads in the sand, ignore the realism, they are entitled to do so but

Well, Live Aid worked didn’t it?

"Poverty porn" is a great analogy Growstuff, I think that it is exactly like that. I don't object at all to reports from war and disaster zones if they are actually reporting the news and not just showing dying children or distressed adults - that, in my opinion, is salacious. I know lots of people will disagree.

Anyway, don't get me started on royal weddings

Alegrias1

It seems we agree that showing distressed people on the news doesn't make the "rule-breakers" behave differently. So they should stop doing it.

The purpose of the news should not be to influence anybody's behaviour, whether we think they are behaving badly or not. That is how fascist countries use the news. I don't want reporters trying to influence me or anybody else for that matter.

Its the responsibility of the government to enforce the rules or encourage people to follow them. Casdon asked how we could do that. Well, how about using good examples of people doing the right thing. Discouraging football teams from swanning off for "training camps" in Dubai when the rest of us can't leave our local area, then asking them to explain to their fans why they decided to behave properly. Not having people on TV bumping elbows when that is not allowed, because you are too close to the other person. Make sure everyone appearing indoors on TV wears a mask.

In summary, model good behaviour on TV and show people how they should be behaving. Lead by example.

I don't watch live TV, so good behaviour on TV wouldn't influence me at all, nor would knowing where footballers train. I didn't see the documentary either.

In addition, younger people watch considerably less TV than older people.

I assume you object to "poverty porn" and news from war and disaster zones too Alegrias. It's as much news as footage from the latest royal family wedding.

There were 1,162 new deaths recorded yesterday (7 January), which pushes the 7 day average up to 707.

If those deaths didn't occur yesterday, they happened sometime, which pushes the figures from other days up. The last two weeks have been a little strange because there have been bank holidays, which is why the 7 day average figure gives a more accurate picture.

Incidentally, they're from PHE, NHSX, Public Health Scotland and Public Health Wales, which are quicker to report than than the ONS and include all deaths within 28 days of a positive Covid test.

ONS report deaths differently. It usually takes a few days to register a death, so there's a lag in data. The ONS reports all deaths with Covid on the death certificate as a contributory factor. Hence, the discrepancy between the two figures. ONS figures are slightly higher than the ones from the hospitals.

I haven't seen the TV reports but this piece in today's Guardian from an NHS respiratory consultant paints a very vivid picture of what hospitals are contending with:

www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/07/so-many-covid-patients-younger-this-time-hospitals-full

I was struck by these two paragraphs which go some way to explaining why hospitals are so full:

There is a common misconception about ventilation and respiratory support. These are not treatments; they simply stop people dying while they hopefully heal. Dexamethasone, the steroid identified as effective at reducing mortality in the Recovery trial, is the single best treatment we have available for Covid.

It certainly stops many people dying, but it may not make them better, at least not quickly. This is a large part of our current problem: people who previously died within a few days now need respiratory support for weeks on end. Our mortuary is emptier than it was, but the hospital is much fuller.

'While they hopefully heal ...'

Is this where the Nightingale hospitals could come into use, when people are past the worse but still need support?

However, I think I read that beds and respiratory equipment have now been removed from the London Excel Nightingale which is being switched to an immunisation centre.

It seems we agree that showing distressed people on the news doesn't make the "rule-breakers" behave differently. So they should stop doing it.

The purpose of the news should not be to influence anybody's behaviour, whether we think they are behaving badly or not. That is how fascist countries use the news. I don't want reporters trying to influence me or anybody else for that matter.

Its the responsibility of the government to enforce the rules or encourage people to follow them. Casdon asked how we could do that. Well, how about using good examples of people doing the right thing. Discouraging football teams from swanning off for "training camps" in Dubai when the rest of us can't leave our local area, then asking them to explain to their fans why they decided to behave properly. Not having people on TV bumping elbows when that is not allowed, because you are too close to the other person. Make sure everyone appearing indoors on TV wears a mask.

In summary, model good behaviour on TV and show people how they should be behaving. Lead by example.

If Fergus Walsh's report was designed to encourage people to obey the rules that's a good thing. The trouble is those who break the rules probably aren't watching BBC news. I don't know how they can be reached so that they know how serious it is.

As you say Growstuff
Because the government's own statistics site does report an average of more than 600 reported deaths over a 7 day period with over 1,000 yesterday

And 1162 reported today.
It makes December’s figures very yesterday’s news.

One of the things that I found worrying was the obvious exhaustion on the faces of the staff in that ICU. They are working extra shifts in full PPE which is uncomfortable. This is happening in hospitals all over the UK. There are already many staff off sick with Covid and isolating and those left are in danger of burnout.
Apart from the many people seriously ill with Covid we need to be aware that the staff are struggling.

Just read your last post Growstuff. I know I'm not the only person who can interpret data. But its very clear that the news authorities either can't, or are interpreting it in a way that suits their narrative and are representing it wrongly.

None of this was directed at you, not at all.

Oh dear, I'm making myself unpopular .

Never meant to suggest that you didn't know it was nine months old WOODMOUSE, sorry that it came across that way.

Growstuff I think we are looking at the same page. The topmost graph is deaths reported by date of death, latest data is from 5th January. Last 4 days are incomplete figures. Average up until 30th December was 551. At no time so far in the second wave has the number been above 600.

The second graph down is deaths given by the day they were reported to the authorities. Latest data is from 6th January, i.e. what was reported yesterday. Average up until yesterday was 685. While many of the 1,000 deaths reported yesterday have happened since 1st January, some happened as far back as the 8th December.

My complaint was about the people on the news saying 1,000 people died yesterday. That was the actual wording that was used, so people think we've had a huge surge in deaths in one day. But, we haven't. That is scaremongering. It suggests that this is more out of control than it really is. Of course it doesn't take away from the fact that we know that 1,000 more people have died, but they didn't all die on the same day.

It is news after all, and the more the public sees what’s happening the better.

MawBe

^I've found the news coverage of the pandemic to be sensationalist and scaremongering and we don't need to see any more reporters with concerned faces ramping up the panic and mis-interpreting the facts (?). The use of grieving widows and children, and terrified people who have partially recovered telling us how bad things are, isn't news, it's sensationalism^
Neither scaremongering nor sensationalism. Maybe an invasion of privacy but I think necessary if the general public will not accept the facts without seeing for themselves .
Doubting Thomas started a bit of a trend those 2000+ years ago.

I totally agree.

Alegrias I'm not responsible for poor journalism and reporting. I know very well that statistics have been manipulated, depending on the intended purpose. That's why I spent some time trying to understand what the figures actually do mean. You're not the only person who can interpret data.

Are you reading the same site as I did? I was reading the one in your link.

Alegrias1

Why would you say that there have been more than 600 deaths per day when that is what is on the governments own statistics site Growstuff? I am going to guess that you mean deaths were Covid is on the certificate? Remembering that this is not the measure that they cite on the news, its the 28 day one.

The same website has data up to 18th December and average deaths per day then under the death certificate measure was 482. We can't make any prediction yet about what that will be in the last 3 weeks. Although I'm sure we agreed it will be significantly higher.

Because the government's own statistics site does report an average of more than 600 reported deaths over a 7 day period with over 1,000 yesterday.

I don’t disagree with what you’ve said Allegrias1, I’m just not sure how the deniers are ever going to be convinced that there is a pandemic, or the rule breakers are ever going to be stopped from putting other people’s lives at risk.

If they don’t watch or believe the news, and showing the impact of the virus in real time isn’t part of the solution, what other tools are there? Law enforcement, and seeing their own friends and relatives die which may impact on their behaviour are the ones that come to my mind.