Fuck the BBC


Of course, Google! Why didn’t I think of that?

Thanks boss. I know BBC have gone pretty low with their journalism for the past decade (poss before but I’m too young to know really) but this is genuinely shocking to me. Goes way beyond their normal bullshit.


Interesting, they’ve updated the headline. Still fucking irrelevant.


Done my complaint


What could possibly have happened around 2011 in this country that could otherwise explain this trend, though?


Do people think this is the tories? I would have thought their impact would take a long time to be reflected in life expectancy, at risk groups maybe quicker, but the average for the entire population seems unlikely


They literally quote a social research and statistics expert who attributes it to poverty and austerity only for the editorial bit at the end to completely ignore it. Infuriating.


120,000 deaths is likely to affect the national average




Looked into that 120,000 figure, the authors themselves say it doesnt prove causation but rather just shows an association (an association with a period of time, basically they noticed a trend).

Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure many have died at the hands of the tories, and that will be reflected in health metrics, I might be wrong in thinking it wouldn’t show up in general life expectancy yet. I just don’t think it is right to automatically bash the tories over it, not because I have any sympathy for them but rather that it undermines the oppositions credibility if criticisms aren’t robust. At the moment the reasons for the stalling life expectancy hasn’t been proven, it definitely needs to be explored


The article states that the life expectancy figures are based on the previous three years’ death rates, so it would be showing up already.


I guess life expectancy is something I think about as a long term thing, so the impacts of living in poverty and the long term health consequences of that, I think the full impact will be in 70 years. If changes to services are reflected in the last three years the impact must be so drastic to offset the natural growth then it should also be reflected in loads of other measures, deaths in hospital, deaths waiting for treatment, cancer survival rates etc should be able to establish how bad services have become (think in my mind I have an assumption of a large number of deaths outside of health/social care services which I guess doesn’t hold up), so think if research into that shows the services are to blame then it can be attributed to them. So far ons have suggested particularly bad flu seasons (I get that flu in itself is not unpolitical, with fuel poverty, availability of treatment, but you do also get objectively worse flu seasons too), also pre trump America has a similar trend to us, could be shared life style changes or something. I don’t know, just think it’s important to not misuse statistics, we don’t like it when tories do it, the data is definitely enough to warrant further investigation but not enough to draw conclusions yet


There are a lot of useful links in this, from the ONS:


for example:



Still an association rather than casaution, can’t seem to find the R² of their model there to judge how good it is.

Thing I was getting at earlier but failed to articulate, I don’t know how life expectancy is calculated but it can’t just be about people falling ill and dying, it’s also about people going longer without falling ill, that’s why intuitively I think deteriorating services people use when they are dying would need to be pretty extreme to offset the general trend in longer health. Obviously I don’t know what I’m talking about but still don’t think the bbc should have attributed it in their article, they covered it as a possibility which seems appropriate


Surely editing the Evening Standard occupies more of your time than this.


Did the BBC cover it as a possibility, or did they suggest that it was likely to be one, or both, of two other things?


“It is not clear what is driving the trend, but some academics have argued that government austerity policies, such as cuts to social care budgets in England, must have played a part.

Ministers have said that no such causation can be proved, although Public Health England has been asked to carry out a review of life expectancy trends.

Dr Kingsley Purdam, senior lecturer in social research methods and statistics at the University of Manchester, said the figures were “shocking”.

“Poverty, austerity and cuts to public services are impacting on how long people are living in the UK,” he said.

"We all need to look after our health but many of us, including the most vulnerable populations, need help at a time when evidence suggests that services are being cut.”

Seems a fair write up


Not a fair comparison


Hm. They’ve added a fair bit of that since I posted the link.

And the ‘analysis’ section at the bottom makes no mention of it.


so that’s who my mates wife was talking about when she was posting pictures of bleach saying it was her favourite bottle of bleach the other day. thought she’d lost her fucking mind


Amazing :smile: