Individual experiences and suffering are at the center of the epidemic. One way to understand what has happened is through putting those experiences together. The numbers that have been flying around have brought unprecedented demand to explain.
We have had to learn some hard lessons, such as the journalistic skill of brevity, because of its problems. We have been writing a weekly column about Covid numbers in this paper since January of 2021.
More or Less on Radio 4 has shown how much can be done to explain statistics without visual aids, and it can be frustrating not being able to show all the graphs. We have had to be careful with numbers, which is harder when they are so precious to us, because of the mathematical formulae and technical jargon.
We had to agree on our purpose as a challenge is to fend off the media appetite for blame, speculation and controversy, naturally fed by the broad spectrum of opinion among experts. One camp has supported suppression of virals, while others have doubts about the measures taken, which is a cliche that their extreme followers can be identified by.
In political combat, numbers are often used to beat opponents, but they should be used to raise the quality of the debate. We see ourselves as part of a group who have tried to keep away from policy disputes, and some of our most trusted sources are skilled individuals who do analyses in their spare time, who then share their insights on social media to inform rather than persuade.
The Pandemic has been rife with false claims and misinformation. One approach for dealing with this, supported by empirical evidence, is the idea of "inoculation", which is telling people about the incorrect interpretation before they catch it in the wild.
The ONS is pictured.
When Public Health England first published data showing that most older people who had recently died with Covid-19 had been vaccine free, we tried this strategy. We wrote an article that said that the vaccine was imperfect and that the majority of people had been given the vaccine. Most people who die in car accidents are wearing seatbelts, but this does not mean that seatbelts are not effective, it is just that nearly everyone wears one and they are not perfect.
The response to our pre-bunking was not encouraging. The link to our article was on the social networking site, and it was titled, Why most people who now die with Covid in England have had a vaccine, and not the subhead. It was wrongly interpreted as an anti-vaccination article and spread online. This led to critical comments suggesting that we had encouraged vaccine scepticism and that we should be hunted down and destroyed. We made light of this, saying that we had had worse reports from the referees. The account was removed from the micro-messaging service.
DS has been called an "idiot", a "shameless liar" and a "Nazi collaborators". This is mild compared to what others have received.
Brazil's president used UK data to support his claim that vaccines cause Aids.
It got more complicated when Robert Peston, the political editor of ITV, said that infections were higher among double vaxxed for those 40 to 79 than for non-vaxxed. He was not referring to the absolute case numbers, which could be explained using the reasoning above. The case rates per 100,000 people were referred to. It seems strange, but it can be explained by the use of the National Immunisation Management System for population figures, which uses GP lists, and so tends to overcount. The Office for National Statistics uses population estimates that are uncertain to lead to lower case-rates in vaccine groups.
Brazil's President Bolsonaro used the UK data to support his claim that vaccines cause Aids. The UK Health Security Agency refuses to change its publication so that misleading numbers continue to feed vaccine misinformation despite the fact that unvaccinated rates are in a lighter fonts.
The media has handled Covid-19 numbers poorly. Our impression is that most outlets have tried to explain their issues. It is impossible without the work of those who produce the Covid dashboard, the ONS Infection Survey, and other sources.
The Royal Statistical Society is where we started working together. Data needs people to speak honestly and carefully on its behalf. It could have terrible consequences in health, wealth and justice. Better statistics should lead to better debate and better decisions.
