tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
You've missed the point about double counting deaths mate ( or, to be fair, I didn't explain it well )
At some point, these numbers need reconciling between what comes out of the hospitals and what's on the register of deaths. To be able to reconcile those numbers, you need to know that deceased <a> from one source ( the hospital ) is the same as deceased <b> from the register.
I'm not saying I'm 100% certain that's the situation here, but, from past experience, I think it's plausible, and I certainly think it's more plausible than some weird conspiracy theory.
End of the day, if you're an intelligent, compassionate person ( which, from your posting history, I'd say you are ), you wouldn't be getting your boxers in a twist over the numbers of deaths having some degree of lag associated with them. You'd have to be an paranoid effwit of the highest order to care about such a thing. Sadly, there are people on here, and elsewhere, who fit said description of effwits ( all be it, doubtless well meaning with their effwittery ).
/ rant over ... time for bed
Thanks (I think), but the double counting problem you identify wouldn’t come up - they appear, at least based on what the ONS said, to not be using registered deaths for the daily data, just returns from either individual hospitals or if not that then returns from individual Trusts.
I did post a few days ago an explanation of why there will always be some lag in reporting deaths, especially with community deaths, but this change around consent is (to me at least) inexplainable except as, sadly, some entirely misguided attempt to massage the statistics.