No, I've only ever posted the deaths charts (he does have cases charts, but I have not posted them.)
If you've got confused between deaths and cases that's OK you can just apologise now.
The chart shows that we have more deaths at this stage (5 to days after the first 10 deaths) than Italy.
You can try and dispute that all you like, and moan about how the chart scale is wrong or whatever, but that is an irrefutable fact, in black and white on the chart.
I haven’t got mixed up. He originally posted infection rates charts and used the same graph to try and create a comment - he’s trying to get bites - and it’s definitely been on this thread
The issues are:
- 10 is not an arbitrary number - he’s picked it as the next day the uk trend doubled. So why 10? Is that significant? No
- no one would compare a data set of countries whose trying to draw any sensible conclusions on those with small samples to
Large
- of course the percentage of deaths is hugely significant to cases. If a country had 22 cases and 11 died but only one after the 10 for 3 days it below the curve
The minute you out this up I said that Germany would show a huge spike at the start as it’s off a low base which is exactly what’s happened yet Germany has the lowest rate of deaths of any country on here - well if that’s not relevant to any analysis then i beg to differ
The scaling IS deliberate as it wants to create a curve that suggests we will be ahead of Italy at the point they are now. That’s beyond debate and gives you an insight into this guys thought processes
The death rate has to be relevant to infection - the official death rates in Italy are I think around 3 times higher than the uk - so on that basis this guys original trend graph is wrong (well they are both wrong as they are not actually trend graphs)
There are other factors as well such as the fact most die after 10 days of infection
Tbe comment on Italy aged population is again irrelevant
It’s you that’s putting this graph up not me. Why? What’s it telling you? It’s telling me nothing