Are Scottish COVID19 rates really 5x lower than the U.K.?

[Y0uCann0tBeSer10us]

The UKSA suggests they might not be.

From the article: “On its claim that prevalence of the virus is five times lower than in England, the Scottish Government said the figure was based on “upper prevalence estimates” for Scotland published by its own statisticians, which was then compared with separate Office for National Statistics (ONS) data.

However, Jamie Jenkins, a former head of health analysis at the ONS, said the comparison was “not ideal” as different methodology had been used for both numbers.

The Scottish figure was based on an epidemiological model, while the statistics for England was based on sample testing of a small number of people, meaning a wider estimated range for infection rates.

Statisticians generally caution against making comparisons when different methodology has been used, and it remains unclear why the Scottish Government used the upper rather than central estimates in its comparisons.

Mr Jenkins said: “I think it would be better and fairer for the Scottish Government to compare their number to the same number for England using a similar epidemiological model.””

Also from the article: “The Scottish Conservatives said the latest ONS data actually suggested 0.025 per cent of people had the virus in England. On Wednesday, Ms Sturgeon claimed the figure for Scotland was 0.028 per cent.” Without comparing like for like it’s hard to know, but rates might not be that different after all.

At best this is a dodgy use of statistics, at worst a cynical attempt to deflect from failings by trying to suggest the Scottish ‘method’ is so much more successful.

Yes but still a statement of fact. If you'll look back at what I've written i agree when this is all done a dusted they will be broadly the same. Not sure what your wee face is for?

I'm no mathematician and I certainly don't have the time or energy to do any research of my own but given the way the British media doesn't exactly love NS then why is there no outcry about these apparent lies she's telling? Seems strange to me that she's just get away with making stuff up?

The face is because you are being obtuse, it's not really a "fact" though it is it? Deaths are roughly the same per capita so it seems, but as there is a lack of proper comparable data it's not really about "facts".

I actually think the British media is far more favourable to NS than say Boris Johnson, although I admit it could be indifference rather than ‘love’. The fact that she hasn’t really been challenged on the higher deaths claim and we had to dig that out from the data ourselves kind of proves the point.

I'm no mathematician and I certainly don't have the time or energy to do any research of my own but given the way the British media doesn't exactly love NS then why is there no outcry about these apparent lies she's telling? Seems strange to me that she's just get away with making stuff up?

I'm not really getting why you think the British media doesn't love NS.
The Scottish media is either scared of/in the pocket of the SNP and the rest of the UK really doesn't give much of a shit as they would rather spend their column width of the UK government. NS only appears in overall UK media when they think they can stir up some Scots hate or stir up some shit against Boris etc, they seem to be managing to stir up their own shit so NS is therefore broadly irrelevant currently.

I'm not being obtuse. It's a fact. Didn't realise that stating facts was a problem nowthat was worthy of your derision and your sarcastic wee faces.

I would be more likely to catch it in England than Scotland just now. They are experiencing not insignificant outbreaks. They are also a wee bit further down the loosening of lockdown than us and therefore further into the potential danger of even more localised outbreaks. That has to be a consideration if we are thinking about travel, holidays, visiting family etc. She fair enough to mention it.

If she said yeah we are broadly in the same situation as England then that simply wouldn't be correct at this point.

The Scottish media is either scared of/in the pocket of the SNP

Jesus wept. 🙈

This leads me to believe that Scotland as a country is the geographical and social equivalent of that dress where some people saw blue and black and others saw cream and gold and never the twain should meet!

Because it's not a fact.

You are not "likely" to catch in anywhere at the moment and England is a big place - where specifically are you talking about? vast areas of England have had better infection rates and death rates than parts of Scotland. I'd have more chance of catching it in Glasgow than I would in Northumberland or many other areas for example.

This leads me to believe that Scotland as a country is the geographical and social equivalent of that dress where some people saw blue and black and others saw cream and gold and never the twain should meet!

Yep and some researched and found the correct answer and the rest believed what someone else wanted them to hear.

Okay doke then so if it's not a fact why is she getting away with saying it? Do we not talk about countries as wholes generally in relation to this crisis? I don't see worldometer split up into regions beyond countries?

Who's obtuse now? Spoiler alert 🚨 (it's you)

@sonicbook it depends on where in England you mean, as most of it has the same rate of infections per 100k as we do. If you look at the latest infections data on the BBC link, barring a few hotspots (which are easy to look up) the risk IS no higher in England than Scotland. The ‘England’ vs ‘Scotland’ thing therefore looks political to me.

Yep and some researched and found the correct answer and the rest believed what someone else wanted them to hear.

What?

So we can't talk about countries as a whole then if it doesn't suit you? We must only talk about regions? Got it 👍🏻

Anyway, I'm done now, away to get dinner on and might go and check out the emperors new clothes later.

Very convenient. I'll be waiting patiently for you to explain to me what your confusing statement means.

“Okay doke then so if it's not a fact why is she getting away with saying it?”

Exactly! Why isn’t anyone challenging this? Ineffective media and weak opposition is my guess.

Well yes, we could talk about countries as a whole and compare the UK with Germany or Sweden or the US or wherever. You can find whatever data you want that fits your narrative, that doesn't make any of it actually comparable or "true" in the proper sense. All media is filled with half truths, lies and whatever, people from all sides would do better not to get sucked in.

What confusing statement? You referred to the dress that was perceived in two ways. Regardless of how it was perceived, there was a correct answer, rather than arguing the point, some people went and found what the answer was, others would just insist that what they saw or what other people said was right regardless.

Okay so by that logic neither I nor what the OP says is true. Best just not discuss anything then if there are no absolute truths and anything can be skewed to fit any narrative.

Funnily enough though your strange response to my dress comment seems to suggest that there are absolute truths and some of us are just too thick to see them. So now I'm even more confused.

This is all very post modern of you and sadly I can't keep up 🤷🏻‍♀️

And here's another version of the 'truth' for folk to get their knickers in a twist about.

Of course there are absolute truths, just not many contained in what a politician says or on a newspaper headline. The point is that most folk in the public eye have an agenda, and most folk also have their own views and perceptions. If you want the facts you need to look beyond what is being said and what is being printed and see if it's possible to establish the truth via independent or verified means.

The truth or the questions often lie in what isn't being said. No-one at school is really taught properly how to question and challenge - in my opinion anyway. To establish that as fact we'd need to examine the curriculum, check on how this is tested, do field samples, conduct survey etc etc etc.

I work in a school and I would have to disagree with you. That is what is supposed to be at the heart of the CFE - not always in reality right enough.

What annoys me most is when people cherry picking info just to validate their own narrative.

What annoys me most is when people cherry picking info just to validate their own narrative

Like politicians and newspapers?

I work in a school and I would have to disagree with you. That is what is supposed to be at the heart of the CFE - not always in reality right enough.

imo and e it's not the reality for a lot of teaching. There are some passionate teachers, some great teachers, some good teachers, some ok teachers, some who go through the motions, some who don't have a clue, some who don't give a shit and some who do but are poor anyway etc etc etc. A fair number will never have been taught to think for themselves, inquire, challenge etc either, so difficult to teach that if it's not your own reality.

My DC have been lucky to have some fantastic teachers and some real shitshows and a lot inbetween.

..and not all education takes place in schools, parents have a responsibility too.