Indeed, I thought I would demonstrate the figures in a calculable way, rather than arbitrary numbers per se...
Matt Hancock's been trying to do this and has been sanctioned (twice) by the UK Statistics Authority.
Boris used the example last night in "If 10 in 1000 60 year old men die from the old variant, the new variant would be 13 or 14 but the data is very new."
He then on to say something vague (excuse me, Boris, vague, surely not?) that a similar pattern could be seen elsewhere.
The issue here is that I do not recall a 60 year old man either i. being the most at risk given they are in group 7 alongside a 60 year old woman nor ii. being primarily responsible for breaking lockdown and spreading the virus.
More relevant might be to say that out of 1000 18-24 year olds, 1 might die and that risk has increased to 1.4*
* I do not know the mortality rate in 18-24 year olds.
It is still 40% deadlier than the old variant but the numbers are still, in absolute terms, so small that that age group may not perceive the increased risk as sufficient to change their behaviour. The challenge for the government throughout has been getting its message across to different groups.
I support lockdown, I support tougher restrictions on travel but the messaging is still too vague and misleading.
As for the data is still too new to assess the increased mortality, I struggle with that given the Kent variant has been in place since September and swept through Swale and Medway before spreading across the country, in part due, to the balls up over Christmas.
Remember 77% of 58 women thought their face looked smoother when using Olay for a week.
Statistical significance can be achieved with surprisingly low numbers. If the statistics here are not clear, why is that? Is it due to a poor or ineffective testing strategy, is there too much noise in the data or is it something else?
A statistician would not say it has risen from 10 to 13 or 14. A politician would say that having read the statistician's report and wanted to fudge the data or to highlight one point.
Remember, approximately 10% of the population are estimated to have had the virus and of those that are believed to have had the virus the mortality rate is 0.1% (old variant) in 60 year old men increasing to 0.13-0.14% (range in the new variant).
Each death is a tragedy, it leaves lasting effects on friends and family and the NHS is not equipped to cope with these numbers but the absolute numbers are still relatively small.
They are high enough for me to take steps in my life to try and avoid the risk of contracting the virus, if I haven't already had it, and to minimise the risk of me asymptomatically spreading it.
I neither want to die yet nor to risk living with the effects of long covid should contracting it not prove fatal. Similarly I do not want to be responsible for that outcome in someone else's life.