To wonder how they will record the deaths caused by the pandemic but not by the virus?

[KittyRainbow]

That's it really. I've been thinking about all of the deaths that will be indirectly caused by the measures taken to prevent the spread, or by hospitals/GPs being unable to see people.

The elderly or isolated people who did alone in their homes and nobody notices.
The women murdered by their partners
Suicides
People needing hospital care that isn't available.

How will these be counted? Or will they be brushed under the carpet? Will we ever actually know the full impact of the pandemic on those without the virus?

KittyRainbow deaths are never recorded according to underlying/ contributing social or public policy reasons though are they? If someone commits suicide it's never been categorised as due to bankruptcy or debt or family breakdown is it? There's usually a mental health factor but the socioeconomic factors aren't recorded. Deaths due to austerity were recorded pneumonia or malnutrition not austerity. Deaths due to long waiting lists for medical care aren't recorded with long waiting list as the cause.

anothernotherone It's interesting, I think that while austerity is not given as the cause if death, there are studies and statistical information that can inform people looking into the effects of austerity longer term who will be able to link deaths to austerity. Even when the cause of death is eg malnutrition or suicide on the certificate.

In the way they are able to link some more recent deaths in NYC to situations the people were in on 9/11. So their death is X - but we know it was directly related to 9/11

So I'm interested in how we will record the full ramifications to people's lives & deaths of this pandemic beyond the problems caused by having the virus.

KittyRainbow in exactly the same way - studies after the fact.

There is lots of information about the impact of the great plagues of the middle ages on society (the large number of people who abandoned their families or shut themselves off from the world, the huge numbers of deaths in the following famine but also long term improvement in overall quality of life and social mobility).

There is even more information about comparable more recent events - the vast number of people who died in ww2 from disease and malnutrition rather than bullets and bombs (yet despite this being common knowledge idiots claim on social media that "they" survived the war so [insert random supposedly irrefutable demand or claim] - who's they? I always wonder, because millions upon millions didn't). We're all aware now in a way nobody much acknowledgd at the time of the millions of mostly young men with PTSD and other lifelong psychological consequences of war. Despite the horrors of war and the tens of millions who died as an indirect result we also know that there was massive positive social change as a result in many countries including the UK.

The indirect casualties are always counted after the fact, on a statistical level, by academics though not politicians unless it suits their purpose.

There are also often longer term positive outcomes - in this case the obvious candidate is that there's talk of tackling climate change with the same urgency as covid-19. We shall see. It's too early to know until years later usually.

It won't be on death certificates though because death certificates record the immediate medical cause of death and never have recorded the socioeconomic causes - they can't or they'd be forever being contested in court and nobody could ever have a funeral!

How would you like them to be recorded?

@RandomLondoner, i hadn't actually seen that one when i was looking on wednesday, but i did wonder when that was going to happen.

Someone will probably do an after analysis that will show usually of 10k deaths per week before there were usually x amount motor deaths y accidental, z sucidal, m old age and n heart failure etc etc (breakdown of statistically significat categories based on data for the same week for the preceeding 5 years or so (same week different year due to the cyclical nature of deaths during the year)) and show that car deaths and outdoor deaths are down as are flu and old age and a few other natural causes (many that might of died of old age and other underlying causes over the year or 2 will be dying now instead). So the amount more deaths due to covid may not be the same as the actual amount of deaths of covid, it could be more or less.

You would only be able to say that the lockdown causes more deaths if total deaths minus covid deaths is more than the expected amount of deaths. If total deaths minus covid deaths is significantly smaller than usual you can argue that the lockdown saved more people than just the predicted number that might have gotten covid if it was left rampant.

But it is far more nuanced than that, 1 woman a week is killed by partner but it is found 5 women are killed per week during lockdown then that is bad. But if 30 people a week are killed in road accidents and only 5 people a week during lockdown then that is good. and both can be true at the same time It is hard for people to see things as any thing other than just good or bad but usually there has to be trade offs and we never normally know what they are until after when the data is looked at