Correct. They haven't been updated. They might but the revisions are forwarded to them for people to use in their modelling. If you have an Athens account, you can get at the web link I supplied.

Once redundant returns and FCE corrections are forwarded, a decision is made as to whether the figures expressed in terms of a range fall within that tolerance or not.

It isn't anything to do with sexual health, it's to do with health. The report you keep waving is based on best figures available and, crucially, figures that HPA have used to keep reporting fresh. That does not make them the full picture.

I understand that although Keith is trying to cover his false assertions, to anyone else, you only have me (and public health professionals) to go by. Let me give a sexual health example;

Someone attends a sexual health clinic. There is allowance for anonymous attending and results do not go to your GP unless you agree. Someone tests positive and goes into denial for a few weeks them presents to their GP. This is coded twice and the data trawl used for such as that report shows two diagnoses.

Now... Be buggered to paying twice so when the financial transactions within NHS are sorted the figures alter. Not just double diagnosis bit lots of other items that skew figures. This takes time, more than it should and the new body Public Health England hopes to address this by coordinating the consultants engaged in commissioning. Other parts of The UK are in similar situations going forward.

Im putting that for the interest of others , not Keith A of Hertford. Either he knows it already as it underpins the websites he trawls for the sake of an argument or you can't educate pork. Either could apply.