15 comments on “Dearieme, for you

  1. It’s interesting that Spain is top of the table in the article – I don’t think they spend a lot more on health than the UK, and my observation of Spanish lifestyles suggest they’re rather fond of alcohol and smoking, while (in many parts) vegetables are almost unheard of.

    In comparison, Denmark is a bit worse than the UK. More research needed?

  2. PS I see John, in the original discussion, has pointed out with his usual sagacity that the most likely explanation is that the 2000 census substantially underestimated the population, increasing the raw death rates.

  3. @ Chris Miller
    The 2001 census famously/notoriously underestimated the population of Westminster (to such an extent that Westminster City Council provided the High Court with evidence that more heads of household paid Council Tax to them than the alleged total population and the High Court agreed that the number who were not Heads of Households could not be negative) but it *overestimated* the numbers at higher ages – hence death rates were underestimated and mortality improvements under Blair looked wonderful and Brown blamed “the Actuaries” for the rising cost of the state pension – so that in 2011 there was a headline “where have the 500,000 missing over-80s gone?”
    Mortality improvements under New Labour were a lie.
    Typical …
    Inflation was understated and Economic growth under New Labour was overstated thanks to a lie (a systematic error in the RPI formula introduced in Autumn 1997 was discovered and removed in Autum 2010 but the ONS didn’t go back and revise upwards all the inflation staistics and revise down “real” GDP growth. Unemployment data was manipulated by raising the school-leaving age. Exam results were made to look better by lowering the standards (the local university’s maths course included stuff I had learned when I was 15).

  4. Must say, it’s quite impressive that they can be so accurate with these figures despite not apparently knowing how many people there actually are in the UK, to the nearest couple million.
    Statisticians, eh?

  5. @ bloke in spain
    These figures are precise, based on the assumptions. Sadly they are not accurate.
    One part of Actuarial training is how to make a precise mortality table more accurate by “smoothing” with some horrendously sophisticated formulae the blips caused by random fluctuations in historic data. [Since my time they have extended this technique into non-life insurance so that motor insurers can calculate premium rates for Rolls-Royce or Lamborghini drivers of different ages when there aren’t enough individuals for the “law of large numbers” to apply].

  6. You gave him hell, John 77. Well done. How on earth did that twit wangle on Oxford chair?

    It’s very striking that many of the commenters seem to be there just to lick his arse. Critical thinking is so unfashionable: pearl-clutching is the thing.

  7. It’s amazing that they don’t know with greater accuracy what the population is. It’s almost as if Britain is becoming a third world country.

    Oh, wait…

  8. I did see a table, via Guido, that put Spain in third place for best health service, behind Singapore and Hong Kong. UK was 35th, US 58th. They appeared to be considering costs together with outcomes.
    It is interesting to note that the NHS is supposed to have improved things by cheering us up, rather than any practical effect. Has anyone considered what effect the introduction of TV and comedians had?
    A life expectancy equal to that in Denmark and Germany doesn’t sound bad to me, but if it is perhaps the author could explain what the wicked Tories did to those countries, and how.
    I note that since 1997 a large number of people have arrived that were born elsewhere. One would expect their life expectancy to be influenced by conditions in the country they came from, and hence disrupt trends amongst the native population.

  9. I note that since 1997 a large number of people have arrived that were born elsewhere. One would expect their life expectancy to be influenced by conditions in the country they came from, and hence disrupt trends amongst the native population.

    +1
    And suffering from genetic disorders resulting from generations of cousin marriage.

  10. Jesus H Frederick Christ!

    The change – ‘a million years of life’ – is in a PROJECTION. They once predicted this, now they predict that. It’s all completely FAKE! It’s not real!
    No one will be harmed by their predictions. No one is dying.

  11. @ Pat
    We don’t know the post-1997 numbers: just that 3 million more came than left or died betwen 2001 and 2011. Since a lot of thw “Windrush” immigrants died of old age in that decade we must suppose there was a loy of immigration….

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.