FINALLY!! Ian Duncan Smith Releases Death Statistics! Watch

username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 years ago
#21
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
So you believe that the DWP have either a) a device that says exactly when somebody will die or b) an elixir of life?
When Someone feels they aren't fit to work. Then appeal the decision and die within two weeks- common sense would indicate they aren't fit to work.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 years ago
#22
(Original post by Bornblue)
When Someone feels they aren't fit to work. Then appeal the decision and die within two weeks- common sense would indicate they aren't fit to work.
Does it? To me common sense states that somebody being unfit for work makes them unfit for work. Does this mean that if I try to claim benefits because I have a runny nose and think that that makes me unfit for work, then they reject the claim and I appeal it, I am unfit for work?
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 years ago
#23
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Does it? To me common sense states that somebody being unfit for work makes them unfit for work. Does this mean that if I try to claim benefits because I have a runny nose and think that that makes me unfit for work, then they reject the claim and I appeal it, I am unfit for work?
If that runny nose was the sign of a more serious injury which means you only have a couple of weeks left to live then pretty much yeah.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#24
Report 4 years ago
#24
(Original post by Bornblue)
If that runny nose was the sign of a more serious injury which means you only have a couple of weeks left to live then pretty much yeah.
But you just said that if I say I'm not fit for work that makes it true...
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 years ago
#25
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
But you just said that if I say I'm not fit for work that makes it true...
No I didn't. Now you're just making up my argument to attack it.
I said if someone who dies, had two weeks earlier claimed not to be fit to work and then appealed the decision it indicates they weren't fit to work. Especially if they died of the condition/illness they had at the time when they claimed not to be fit to work.

Now it looks suspicious the fact that thousands of people are dying so soon after being declared fit to work. If they're dying then they're not fit to work.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#26
Report 4 years ago
#26
(Original post by Bornblue)
No I didn't. Now you're just making up my argument to attack it.
I said if someone who dies, had two weeks earlier claimed not to be fit to work and then appealed the decision it indicates they weren't fit to work. Especially if they died of the condition/illness they had at the time when they claimed not to be fit to work.

Now it looks suspicious the fact that thousands of people are dying so soon after being declared fit to work. If they're dying then they're not fit to work.
When are you going to stop ignoring the fact that the vast majority of fatalities are unpredictable?
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#27
Report 4 years ago
#27
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
When are you going to stop ignoring the fact that the vast majority of fatalities are unpredictable?
But they're not.
Here's a list in order of the top causes of deaths in the UK (for males)
1 Heart disease
2 Lung cancer
3 Emphysema/bronchitis
4 Stroke
5 Dementia and Alzheimer’s
6 Flu/pneumonia
7 Prostate cancer
8 Bowel cancer
9 Lymphoid cancer
10 Throat cancer

Now most of those are not 'unpredictable' - most you have to have for a while (longer then two weeks) to die from.

So no, most fatalities are not 'unpredictable'. But besides you're missing the point. The timing death itself doesn't have to be predictable but the fact they are too ill to work.
0
reply
scrotgrot
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#28
Report 4 years ago
#28
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
When are you going to stop ignoring the fact that the vast majority of fatalities are unpredictable?
I tried to look this up and couldn't find any consensus on how many deaths were "unpredictable", let alone a rigorous understanding of what that means in a medical context. So I think you are talking out of your arse.

Now, we are supposed to believe that the DWP/Atos fit for work test is medical examination, as opposed to a tick-box form with quotas. So how many people who die "unpredictably" would have got the all-clear if they had had a full medical two weeks before, do you suppose?
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#29
Report 4 years ago
#29
(Original post by Bornblue)
When Someone feels they aren't fit to work. Then appeal the decision and die within two weeks- common sense would indicate they aren't fit to work.
Not at all.

Common sense says that person could've been killed in a road traffic accident.

Common sense says that person could've had a heart attack.

As has been pointed out before, the numbers are meaningless without further information such as original disability versus cause or death.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#30
Report 4 years ago
#30
(Original post by Bornblue)
But they're not.
Here's a list in order of the top causes of deaths in the UK (for males)
1 Heart disease
2 Lung cancer
3 Emphysema/bronchitis
4 Stroke
5 Dementia and Alzheimer’s
6 Flu/pneumonia
7 Prostate cancer
8 Bowel cancer
9 Lymphoid cancer
10 Throat cancer

Now most of those are not 'unpredictable' - most you have to have for a while (longer then two weeks) to die from.

So no, most fatalities are not 'unpredictable'. But besides you're missing the point. The timing death itself doesn't have to be predictable but the fact they are too ill to work.
It'll be nice to are how many people claiming disabilities we're originally suffering from non of the above.

My money's on an awful lot of these deaths being from people signed off for a bad back.
0
reply
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#31
Report 4 years ago
#31
(Original post by Bornblue)
If that runny nose was the sign of a more serious injury which means you only have a couple of weeks left to live then pretty much yeah.
Or it's just a cold.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#32
Report 4 years ago
#32
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
It'll be nice to are how many people claiming disabilities we're originally suffering from non of the above.

My money's on an awful lot of these deaths being from people signed off for a bad back.
That list covers just over half of all (male) deaths - i'm guessing the female list won't bee too different.

So out of the 2380 people, chances are over half had something on that list. And it's way, way down on the list before you get to causes such as road accidents.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#33
Report 4 years ago
#33
(Original post by Bornblue)
But they're not.
Here's a list in order of the top causes of deaths in the UK (for males)
1 Heart disease
2 Lung cancer
3 Emphysema/bronchitis
4 Stroke
5 Dementia and Alzheimer’s
6 Flu/pneumonia
7 Prostate cancer
8 Bowel cancer
9 Lymphoid cancer
10 Throat cancer

Now most of those are not 'unpredictable' - most you have to have for a while (longer then two weeks) to die from.

So no, most fatalities are not 'unpredictable'. But besides you're missing the point. The timing death itself doesn't have to be predictable but the fact they are too ill to work.
Let's break this down for a second (for 2010 figures, although positions barely change)
  1. Heart disease, largely not predicatble, almost three times as likely as the #2 for biggest killer which is
  2. "malignant neoplasmn on trachea, bronchus and lung", in other words, Lung cancer, all those smokers having their past catching up to them, also predominantly in OAPs, very rare for under 40s
  3. #3, just behind, strokes, again, predominantly OAPs and generally unpredictable
  4. Next up is Chronic lower respiratory diseases, time of death seems largely unpredictable and a quick read would suggest it reduces employability by reducing the number of jobs you can reasonably do, does not, however, make you unfit for work. Seems like another case of smoking catching up with people
  5. Next up, flu and pneumonia, I somehow suspect that these people weren't even claiming in the first place
  6. Next, prostate cancer, something that takes a very long time to kill (in excess of 15 years in the vast majority of cases, unlessoverweight/obese and/or smoking). 99% of cases are in over 50s, so when we then throw in the life expectancy, yet again, we're looking at pensioners
  7. The various arse cancers. Can't seem to find ages with this and the outlook seems fairly bleak, although does seem rather lifestyle based
  8. Dementia and Alzheimer's, judging by the DALY, very few cases in the working age population, 5% of those over 65 have it, our DALY is about 200 or so for it, which would imply that for any significant impact to be felt in the working age population the impact on the elderly is near nil in terms of lifespan
  9. Then we get the various blood and blood related cancers, another thing that picks up at the point where you will likely survive to retirement, if you haven't retired already
  10. Liver disease, finally something that hits the working population hardest, namely due to the alcohol consumption, but then a very minor killer
So, most of these things are heavily weighted towards the oldest in society, with the main exceptions of liver disease and heart disease, now, let's focus on the heart disease, in 18-44 year old about 1 in 20 have heart disease and in 45-64 year olds that more than doubles to 12% in females and 13.8% in males.

Now, what we're really missing is the number of people deemed fit for work, because that determines what percentage of people have died, so that's as far as we can really go.

I would also be quite interested to hear the obesity rates of these people, how many were current or former smokers, and how much they tended to drink, since they are three major factors, especially for the two key causes of death.
0
reply
scrotgrot
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#34
Report 4 years ago
#34
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
x
Top causes of death for working age people. I have bolded those things which are the result of misadventure or something you wouldn't necessarily pick up in a medical examination two weeks before death.

50-64
Heart disease
Lung cancer
Liver disease
Bowel cancer
Emphysema and bronchitis
Cerebrovascular diseases
Suicide
Throat cancer
Lymphoid cancer
Pancreatic cancer
Brain cancer
Flu and pneumonia
Liver cancer
Prostate cancer
Kidney cancer

35-49
Suicide
Heart disease
Liver disease
Accidental poisoning
Cerebrovascular diseases
Lung cancer
Transport accidents (land)
Bowel cancer
Lymphoid cancer
Brain cancer
Flu and pneumonia
Throat cancer
Emphysema and bronchitis
Mental and behavioural (psychoactive substance)
Cardiomyopathy

20-34
Suicide
Accidental poisoning
Transport accidents (land)
Homicide
Liver disease
Epilepsy
Heart disease
Brain cancer
Lymphatic cancer
Cerebrovascular diseases
Accidental falls
Accidental threats to breathing
Mental and behavioural (psychoactive substances)
Congenital defects
Cardiomyopathy

Unfortunately, it looks like if we're going to use this approach we're going to have to assume most of the 2,380 people who apparently died of things that wouldn't have shown up in a medical examination killed themselves. Bit embarrassing really isn't it?
0
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#35
Report 4 years ago
#35
SPIN IT! USE IT EVERYDAY ITS THE GOVERNMENT WAY!

0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#36
Report 4 years ago
#36
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Let's break this down for a second (for 2010 figures, although positions barely change)
  1. Heart disease, largely not predicatble, almost three times as likely as the #2 for biggest killer which is
  2. "malignant neoplasmn on trachea, bronchus and lung", in other words, Lung cancer, all those smokers having their past catching up to them, also predominantly in OAPs, very rare for under 40s
  3. #3, just behind, strokes, again, predominantly OAPs and generally unpredictable
  4. Next up is Chronic lower respiratory diseases, time of death seems largely unpredictable and a quick read would suggest it reduces employability by reducing the number of jobs you can reasonably do, does not, however, make you unfit for work. Seems like another case of smoking catching up with people
  5. Next up, flu and pneumonia, I somehow suspect that these people weren't even claiming in the first place
  6. Next, prostate cancer, something that takes a very long time to kill (in excess of 15 years in the vast majority of cases, unlessoverweight/obese and/or smoking). 99% of cases are in over 50s, so when we then throw in the life expectancy, yet again, we're looking at pensioners
  7. The various arse cancers. Can't seem to find ages with this and the outlook seems fairly bleak, although does seem rather lifestyle based
  8. Dementia and Alzheimer's, judging by the DALY, very few cases in the working age population, 5% of those over 65 have it, our DALY is about 200 or so for it, which would imply that for any significant impact to be felt in the working age population the impact on the elderly is near nil in terms of lifespan
  9. Then we get the various blood and blood related cancers, another thing that picks up at the point where you will likely survive to retirement, if you haven't retired already
  10. Liver disease, finally something that hits the working population hardest, namely due to the alcohol consumption, but then a very minor killer
So, most of these things are heavily weighted towards the oldest in society, with the main exceptions of liver disease and heart disease, now, let's focus on the heart disease, in 18-44 year old about 1 in 20 have heart disease and in 45-64 year olds that more than doubles to 12% in females and 13.8% in males.

Now, what we're really missing is the number of people deemed fit for work, because that determines what percentage of people have died, so that's as far as we can really go.

I would also be quite interested to hear the obesity rates of these people, how many were current or former smokers, and how much they tended to drink, since they are three major factors, especially for the two key causes of death.
Heart disease often is predictable. It differs from heart failure which often isn't
Death from lung Cancer certainly is predictable - it doesn't matter 'whether their past is catching up on them' - people can smoke all their lives and not get lung cancer or you can never smoke and get it. it's not as simple as smoking = lung cancer. Irrelevant. If you have lung cancer - you're not fit to work.

Hardly anything on that list is unpredictable or wouldn't require you to have some form of the illness/disease more than two weeks in advance of dying from it.
0
reply
Erzan
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#37
Report 4 years ago
#37
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Let's break this down for a second (for 2010 figures, although positions barely change)
  1. Heart disease, largely not predicatble, almost three times as likely as the #2 for biggest killer which is
  2. "malignant neoplasmn on trachea, bronchus and lung", in other words, Lung cancer, all those smokers having their past catching up to them, also predominantly in OAPs, very rare for under 40s
  3. #3, just behind, strokes, again, predominantly OAPs and generally unpredictable
  4. Next up is Chronic lower respiratory diseases, time of death seems largely unpredictable and a quick read would suggest it reduces employability by reducing the number of jobs you can reasonably do, does not, however, make you unfit for work. Seems like another case of smoking catching up with people
  5. Next up, flu and pneumonia, I somehow suspect that these people weren't even claiming in the first place
  6. Next, prostate cancer, something that takes a very long time to kill (in excess of 15 years in the vast majority of cases, unlessoverweight/obese and/or smoking). 99% of cases are in over 50s, so when we then throw in the life expectancy, yet again, we're looking at pensioners
  7. The various arse cancers. Can't seem to find ages with this and the outlook seems fairly bleak, although does seem rather lifestyle based
  8. Dementia and Alzheimer's, judging by the DALY, very few cases in the working age population, 5% of those over 65 have it, our DALY is about 200 or so for it, which would imply that for any significant impact to be felt in the working age population the impact on the elderly is near nil in terms of lifespan
  9. Then we get the various blood and blood related cancers, another thing that picks up at the point where you will likely survive to retirement, if you haven't retired already
  10. Liver disease, finally something that hits the working population hardest, namely due to the alcohol consumption, but then a very minor killer
So, most of these things are heavily weighted towards the oldest in society, with the main exceptions of liver disease and heart disease, now, let's focus on the heart disease, in 18-44 year old about 1 in 20 have heart disease and in 45-64 year olds that more than doubles to 12% in females and 13.8% in males.

Now, what we're really missing is the number of people deemed fit for work, because that determines what percentage of people have died, so that's as far as we can really go.

I would also be quite interested to hear the obesity rates of these people, how many were current or former smokers, and how much they tended to drink, since they are three major factors, especially for the two key causes of death.
You're a monster.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#38
Report 4 years ago
#38
(Original post by scrotgrot)
Top causes of death for working age people. I have bolded those things which are the result of misadventure or something you wouldn't necessarily pick up in a medical examination two weeks before death.

50-64
Heart disease
Lung cancer
Liver disease
Bowel cancer
Emphysema and bronchitis
Cerebrovascular diseases
Suicide
Throat cancer
Lymphoid cancer
Pancreatic cancer
Brain cancer
Flu and pneumonia
Liver cancer
Prostate cancer
Kidney cancer

35-49
Suicide
Heart disease
Liver disease
Accidental poisoning
Cerebrovascular diseases
Lung cancer
Transport accidents (land)
Bowel cancer
Lymphoid cancer
Brain cancer
Flu and pneumonia
Throat cancer
Emphysema and bronchitis
Mental and behavioural (psychoactive substance)
Cardiomyopathy

20-34
Suicide
Accidental poisoning
Transport accidents (land)
Homicide
Liver disease
Epilepsy
Heart disease
Brain cancer
Lymphatic cancer
Cerebrovascular diseases
Accidental falls
Accidental threats to breathing
Mental and behavioural (psychoactive substances)
Congenital defects
Cardiomyopathy

Unfortunately, it looks like if we're going to use this approach we're going to have to assume most of the 2,380 people who apparently died of things that wouldn't have shown up in a medical examination killed themselves. Bit embarrassing really isn't it?
There is the very important matter of rates, for instance, suppose the top 10 causes have 100 deaths, all are predictable bar #1, what does this mean? Well, it means anything from 19 to 90 were unpredictable. There is also a difference between being able to diagnose somebody with something and knowing when they will die from it, or do you propose we deem unfit for work everybody with any form of heart or circulatory issue then that's a significant portion of the population that is unfit for work.


(Original post by Bornblue)
Heart disease often is predictable. It differs from heart failure which often isn't
Death from lung Cancer certainly is predictable - it doesn't matter 'whether their past is catching up on them' - people can smoke all their lives and not get lung cancer or you can never smoke and get it. it's not as simple as smoking = lung cancer. Irrelevant. If you have lung cancer - you're not fit to work.

Hardly anything on that list is unpredictable or wouldn't require you to have some form of the illness/disease more than two weeks in advance of dying from it.
See above, knowing illness doesn't mean predictability of death. I very much expect I will have some sort of heart disease when older, possibly even now undiagnosed, there is family history and I hardly look after myself, eat a lot of crap, don't do much exercise, drink a lot and smoke, albeit not very much. I also expect it to be the death of me, but do I know when? Not a clue. When diagnosed will I know when? Almost certainly not. Will I be unfit for work when diagnosed? Doubt it. Before death would an examination indicate I was about to die? Doubt it.

And no, Heart disease is not the same as heart failure, but heart failure is very frequently caused by heart disease or some other common illness or lifestyle choice, including high blood pressure and excessive drinking.


And to both of you, deaths in the working population: about 100,000 per year, total who died within two weeks of ceasing their ESA (including it being ceased due to their death): just shy of 20,000 per annum. The number of deaths after being deemed fir for work: 865 per annum. So, given that in all three ages of Scrotgot's list at the very least the top cause of death has no way to reliably predict the time of death in most cases, in two groups you cannot even necessarily determine there even is an issue from a physical assessment, how are so few fatalities in a population group that is, logically, already higher risk a clear indicator of failure other than "hur hur hur, Tories want to kill teh poor"?
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#39
Report 4 years ago
#39
(Original post by Erzan)
You're a monster.
Oh, how constructive of you, is that the best you can come up with?
0
reply
Midlander
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#40
Report 4 years ago
#40
If the trebling in the number of deaths since the Tories took charge is attributable to something else why must the DWP feel the need to begrudgingly release the information? Simply put it in context and explain that it's all a coincidence?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What's stopping you doing a masters?

It's too expensive (17)
24.29%
My career doesn't need one (7)
10%
I'm sick of studying (14)
20%
I can't find a course I want to do (2)
2.86%
I don't know enough about them (8)
11.43%
Nothing, I'm going to do it! (22)
31.43%

Watched Threads

View All