A certain untruth

Stuart Adamson says:
August 6 2020 at 8:28 pm
I remember one prediction you made..

“deaths of more than 10,000 a day are likely in little more than a week”

That was off the mark

Richard Murphy says:
August 6 2020 at 8:39 pm
Lockdown then happened

Unemployment need not be as high as I forecast if action is taken

Context matters

Hmm, well:

As he says, what is notable about the first chart is that everyone else is succeeding in curtailing covid-19 now. We are not.

If the UK current trajectory continues – and as we run out of medical facilities that is a reasonable assumption for the next week or more – then deaths of more than 10,000 a day are likely in little more than a week if the rate of growth seen yesterday continues.

OK, that was on April 2.

Except, UK lockdown started on March 16, went into overdrive March 23. His prediction was 10 days after lockdown, not before.

Does he just think that no one will check these claims?

17 thoughts on “A certain untruth”

  1. “If the UK current trajectory continues”. I love me a bit of linear extrapolation without any consideration for other variables. The statisticians and quants can perhaps delay their trip to the job centre until someone reads “an introduction to GCSE maths”.

  2. Dennis, Heavily Armed and Itchin' For Trouble

    Given that his claims change on a daily basis, I doubt he cares.

    Beyond that, remember the First Rule of Being Spud: I am never wrong.

  3. The fat fvck bandies “liar” about rather freely when referring to Trump and BJ etc, but as a left winger is entitled to lie himself in the public interest.

    Nice to see Stuart Adamson surfacing again, the guitarist of the old Skids. I do think he died a while ago, mind.

  4. That was absolutely my first thought when he came up with that defense. That he went for the absurd 10k per day post lockdown restrictions. Couldn’t be bothered to check myself but well done for pointing out his bare faced lie.

  5. The Meissen Bison

    Does he just think that no one will check these claims?

    It’s not so much that, it’s more a question of his utterances being true only at the moment he makes them which makes his predictions wonderfil but unreliable. His truths are as transient as the patterns in a kaleidoscope.

  6. Also in Spudland the claim that….

    “The Green New Deal is a recurring theme of mine, largely because I have been involved in it from the outset as one of the authors of the original 2008 report proposing a Green New Deal.”

    …Doesn’t stack up against the proposals put forward by The Green Party in the USA in 2006 which (they claimed) would

    “…convert the old, gray economy into a new, sustainable economy that is environmentally sound economically viable and socially responsible. It seeks to solve the climate crisis by combining quick action to get to net- zero greenhouse gas emissions and 100% renewable energy by 2030”

    And was called “The Green New Deal”.

  7. Reminds me of his claim that rationing ‘would be essential’ – the problem is he is incapable of admitting error and indeed were he to do so the entire mental house of cards he has constructed around his own infallibility and supreme level of knowledge might collapse and precipitate a total mental breakdown.

  8. Lots of con men–NiV (now ensconced with a “better class of commenter” on Samizdata) for one–also was one of a group over there always promising mass deaths next wk–right through until May/June when it went a bit silent.

  9. Surreptitious Evil


    Bloody well hope not. On either account. In the former for the sake of humanity and in the latter merely for myself and my nearest and dearest,

  10. Some Economics
    Bank of England: “Good news, C-19 Scam won’t be worst recession in 300 years”

    – Economist Jonathan Davis: “We are now entering the biggest recession since the 1930s

    Completely the result of Johnson’s overreacting coupled with the BBC’s installation of fear.
    How people walk around the street with masks on their face in this heatwave shows the level of brainwashing that’s taken place.
    The problem is not the virus it’s Johnson, Sturgeon and the media et al.

    Put all those furlough workers on universal credit, And see how quickly they want to get back to work

    The really frightening thing is Gov want more deaths to justify lockdown. Now they & msm want a second wave to prove lockdown correct. Fact lockdown was to “flatten curve to save NHS” airbrushed from history

    – ‘As a classic Conservative, I’m concerned about Boris Johnson’s administration

    We have a conservative Government whose leader and MPs are frightened of being conservatives…

    – Gemma Godfrey, Executive editor of Times Money Mentor Financial:
    “Companies Who Turn a Profit Should Pay Back Furlough Money”

    Incentive to not make a profit? Is she thick? No, a vindictive leftie bitch

  11. Bloke in North Dorset

    Slightly OT. This is good from the Speccie’s COVID 19 newsletter:

    “ The real Covid-19 threat
    By Prof Carl Heneghan

    Daniel Kahneman called it anchoring; I call it tunnel vision. It’s when we depend too heavily on our pre-existing ideas and first pieces of information – the anchor – to inform our judgments. How a problem is perceived, how it is described, how it makes us feel alongside our individual experience and expertise shapes the decisions we make. Anchoring ensures emerging evidence is ignored. Even in the face of this new contradictory evidence, we refuse to change our early decisions.

    In the week ending the 24 July, 8,891 deaths were registered in England and Wales (161 fewer than the five-year average). This is the sixth week in a row that we have observed fewer deaths, a total of 1,413 fewer deaths than expected. While the number of deaths in care homes and hospitals remains below the average, the number in private homes remains higher than the five-year average. There were 727 more deaths in private homes in the week ending the 30 July.

    Deaths at home have been almost 40 per cent higher than the number registered with Covid-19 in any other setting in the last six weeks, (4,526 versus 2,799). It is not clear why there is such an excess but one thing is clear: it is not Covid. Fewer than 5 per cent of deaths in private homes are due to the virus.

    These excess deaths represent a considerable number of unexplained – and potentially avoidable deaths – particularly if they represent individuals deterred from visiting hospitals. Public Health England suggests this might be the case, and it is a substantial problem – half of people they surveyed with a worsening health condition did not seek advice for their condition. The most common reason was to avoid putting pressure on the NHS.

    Analysis of NHS data reveals the deadly consequences of the government’s messaging to ‘stay at home, save lives, protect the NHS.’ During the lockdown, there was a near 50 per cent decline in admissions for heart attacks. The risks of Covid-19 outweighed the risk of seeking NHS care despite worsening symptoms for many people: 40 per cent more people died from lower-risk treatable heart attacks than usual. For strokes, the situation is further exacerbated by living alone and not having visitors as 98 per cent of emergency calls for strokes are made by someone else.

    There have been seven registered Covid deaths in children – representing a tiny risk. However, delays in seeking medical help might have contributed to the deaths of at least nine children, according to a survey of doctors. One-third of the 241 emergency paediatricians asked had witnessed delayed presentations. Some doctors reported late presentations during labour that resulted in adverse outcomes; some said early discharges after birth led to infants returning with severe dehydration.

    A recent government report suggests 200,000 people might die because of delays in healthcare and the economic and social consequences of the Covid-19 lockdown. NHS figures show that urgent cancer referrals made by English GPs are down by 47 per cent in May compared with last year; 26,000 people are waiting more than a year for routine operations, and more than half a million people have been waiting over six weeks for essential tests.

    The coronavirus outbreak has involved powerful emotions and strong impulses for taking action. Despite evidence pointing to the contrary, many want to stay in lockdown. Relying too heavily on the first piece of information we come across is a bad idea. We all need to be aware of the fact that we have this anchoring tendency. The solution involves slowing your decision-making processes, seeking additional viewpoints and information. Reacting in haste acts to underpin anchoring and its associated problems.

    When it comes to Covid-19, the real threat is not the disease; it’s how we react to the emerging information.”

  12. Yes, but you’re not going to see a change of strategy from someone whose career depends on them remaining committed to the existing one.

  13. Lockdown did not start on the 16th. Anything prior to “enforced” is not lockdown; it’s simply advisory. Few should be unhappy with advisory, that’s treating people like adults: give them useful information, even provide recommendations, and then let them make their own decisions.

    And the data is quite clear that what happened prior to “enforced” was more than enough to take us past peak infections (ie “save the NHS”).

  14. Stupid thing is that in this case he could more easily say knew it wouldn’t happen but what’s just extrapolating the exponential nature of true virus to make a point about how bad it could have or would become, using a number to make people sit up and listen. Instead he’s so arrogant and stupid he tries defending the claim he made.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *