As I understand it, the deaths for which LL was suspected of murder were first identified as suspicious deaths and only then was an investigation launched to identify if there were any nurses on duty when they died. Thus comparisons with deaths at other hospitals are meaningless.
Have a look at the front page of dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.13777.54886 It shows example of news reports specifically talking about a spike in deaths triggering the investigation.
Thank you Norman, it strikes me that the 3 deaths recorded in 2017 indicate a higher mortality rate than the 4 deaths in 2014 because the unit was downgraded and therefore had fewer patients. Is that right?
No the crude mortality rate was lower in 2017 than 2014, but the ket thing that the crude rate does not capture is the fact that the unti was no longer taking the most critically ill babies
@@NormanFenton81 Sorry I see that now. I wonder what sort of investigations went on into the outcomes at Sherwood Forest in 2014 and Dorset in 2015. If their predicament were documented and reported on, that might help the cause of LL.
Thanks for this. I don’t disagree with your conclusions but your 95% confidence interval looks huge compared to a peer group with nothing above 9 deaths in a year: 0 to 22 deaths. Have downloaded your paper so will be interested to see your methodology.
The thing is there is very little data to go on and only Bayes can properly handle such limited data. Inevitably the uncertainty is huge with such limited data
As written 'in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established',the evil deed must be seen,not statistical, circumstantial, theoretical evidence etc;not enough witnesses to condem?no conviction,no case,case closed.
Circumstantial evidence is regarded as the least reliable source of evidence and must be carefully examined for veracity and whether its prejudicial value outweighs its evidentary value. In many situations, a court will refuse to use it, particularly in criminal proceedings, where proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required.
Don't have all the data, but simply because it's possible, and probable that 'one of these days' you would expect it to happen, to happen doesn't suggest one's innocence. Let's not blind ourselves.
It's not only statistical evidence that point to Lucy being innocent. Enough doctors, including consultant neonatologists have pointed out that the medical evidence in the case is implausible for it to appear that Dr Dewi Evans plucked it out of thin air. For example consultant neonatologist Dr Svilena Dimitrova had this to say "I have no idea if Lucy Letby is innocent but if there is evidence of guilt it has not been presented to the courts" Dr Michael McConville called the medical evidence "utter crap" and went on to say "Facts used to matter in a trial. The Letby insulin story, like the Letby air embolism story is just that, a well spun yarn without a single fact to hold it together."
@@bengilkes7676 Correct - don't have all the data. Nor will I (we) ever have it all. My point being that simply because it's possible doesn't mean it's legit. For example: shuffle a deck of cards, spread them out and pick 5. Could've picked a royal flush on your first try, right? Of course. Did it happen? If it did, you would be looked at rather closely, even though it's bound to happen to someone.
@@roginutah If it was the case that the chart represented every 'collapse' event that happened when Lucy Letby was employed at CoCH then the 'fact' that she was on duty for each one while none of the other staff were on duty for more than a small number, then indeed that would be highly probative statical evidence against Lucy. But that was all nonsense. There were many other 'collapses' when Lucy was not present. Moreover, unlike the other nurses they counted Lucy as being present if she was there on the previous shift.
The babies Lucy was supposed to have murdered had post mortems and were found to have died from natural causes. If there had been evidence of foul play the Coroner would have been informed and the bodies examined by a forensic pathologist
Meanwhile, at the Thurwell Enquiry, doctors and managers are getting roasted, one by one, for reporting deaths to the police too late ! Presumably a whole tranche of new serial-killer-nurses are in the pipeline.
Indeed the Sally Clarke case was also notorious for the expert witness Roy Meadow stating a ludicrously flawed statistic (1 in 73 million for the probability of 2 SIDS deaths)
Say, another member of staff is pinching your lunch from the fridge everyday of the week. You want to work out who it is so you make a chart. You don't like the look of Doris so you focus just on the days she works and leave off the days she doesn't work. She just so happens to be the only member of staff that works all of the days on the chart so she must be guilty. Stupid right.
UK University History Students can only present theories and study from books published in the last 20 years, unless quoting from original source info. How can this present a reasoned view on history?
Some of the comments by other nursing staff say LL was under suspicion 2 years prior to her arrest. Why wasn’t she immediately suspended? Or put under surveillance? Another nurse said, LL was the only nurse to report a raw sewage leakage on the unit.
Lies damn lies and statistics. I don't have any statistical qualifications, and my understanding of stats is pretty basic, but even I can see this chart is fundamentally flawed. Equally, had these basic facts not been explained, I would, as a jurer, have taken it as damning evidence. I'm not saying she's innocent, but that piece of evidence is clearly flawed.
Thank you, gentlemen, for writing this book. I've bought two copies so far and intend to buy more as gifts for friends. I was suspicious of the narrative from very early on and was glad to find your articles quite soon. As your own understanding of events unfolded so did mine and you have supplied the data and statistical knowledge which has undermined almost everything I thought I knew about virology and vaccines. This has been quite an education for me.
@34:20 Not only do we have short memories but, as I have discovered since digging into this subject, the history of science is a glossy PR version of what really went on. Anyone whose curiosity about vaccines or viruses has been piqued by this event might benefit from reading Forrest Maready's book The Moth in the Iron Lung: A Biography of Polio, or Inventing the AIDS Virus by Peter H. Duesberg, now out of print and only available as an audiobook, but which involves Tony Fauci, interestingly enough.
The people who forced this are now part of some NGO and reaping the benefits of free money free travel etc. in government? Toe the line and when you get thrown out, join the WEF or the WHO. It’s all a con. Look at Blair………..
