The WHO claimed more than 4.7 million people in India—10 times higher than the official figures---might have lost their lives due to the virus

India has rejected the methodology adopted by the WHO to show excess deaths caused by Covid-19 in the country, stating that the UN body ignored authentic data published by the Registrar General of India (RGI) through the Civil Registration System.

“India has been consistently objecting to the methodology adopted by the WHO to project excess mortality estimates based on mathematical models. Despite India’s objection to the process, methodology and outcome of this modelling exercise, the WHO has released the excess mortality estimates without adequately addressing India’s concerns,” the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare said in a statement on Thursday.

The Ministry questioned the robustness of the models used and methodology of data collection by the WHO.

The Ministry said the WHO itself admitted that its mathematical model used the data of seventeen Indian states from some websites and media reports.

In the course of its communications with the WHO, India had questioned the criteria and assumptions used by the WHO to classify countries into Tier I and II groups. It had questioned the WHO’s basis of placing India into Tier II countries.

As per the Ministry, the WHO has not responded to India’s objection till date as to why it has been placed into Tier II countries, given the accuracy of the mortality data collected through an effective and robust statutory system.

“Registration of births and deaths in India is extremely robust and is governed by decades old statutory legal framework i.e. “Births & Deaths Registration Act, 1969”. The Civil Registration data as well as Sample Registration data released annually by the RGI has been used by a large number of researchers, policy makers and scientists both domestically & globally,” the Ministry said.

The Ministry further said the RGI is over a century old statutory organization and is assisted by Chief Registrars of states/UTs and about 3 lakhs Registrars/Sub-Registrars across the country. Based on reports submitted by states/UTs, National reports - Vital Statistics of India based on Civil Registration System (CRS) are published annually by the RGI.

The last such National Report for the year 2019 was published in June 2021 and for the year 2020 has been published on May 3, 2022. These reports are in public domain, the Ministry added.

“India firmly believes that such robust and accurate data generated through the Legal Framework of a Member State must be respected, accepted and used by WHO rather than relying on less than accurate mathematical projection based on non-official sources of data,” the Ministry maintained.

In its report, the WHO said between January 2020 and December 2021, there were 4.7 million “excess” Covid deaths in India.

“This reflects a statistically unsound and scientifically questionable methodology of data collection for making excess mortality projections in case of India,” the Ministry said, while ripping the WHO apart for its use of the model to project excessive Covid-19 related deaths in India.

“Throughout the process of dialogue, engagement and communication with WHO, WHO has projected different excess mortality figures for India citing multiple models, which itself raises questions on the validity and robustness of the models used,” the Ministry said.

“India objected to the use of Global Health Estimates (GHE) 2019 in one of the models used by WHO for calculating excess mortality estimates for India. GHE itself is an estimate. Therefore, a modelling approach which provides mortality estimates on the basis of another estimate, while totally disregarding the actual data available within the Country exhibits lack of academic rigour,” the Ministry said in its rejoinder to the WHO’s report.

“The test positivity rate (another key variable used by WHO) for Covid-19 in India was never uniform throughout the country at any point of time. Such a modelling approach fails to take into account the variability in COVID positivity rate both in terms of space and time within the country. The model also fails to take into account the rate of testing and impact of different diagnostic methods (RAT/RT-PCR) used in different geographies,” the Ministry said.

“Owing to its large area, diversity and a population of 1.3 billion which witnessed variable severity of the pandemic both across space and time, India consistently objected to the use of “one size fits all”, approach and model, which may be applicable to smaller countries but cannot be applicable to India. In one of the models, India's age-sex distribution was extrapolated based on the age-sex distribution of excess deaths reported by other countries incomparable in terms of demography and size with India and India’s request to use the available data from authentic Indian source was not considered,” the Ministry added.

The model assumed an inverse relationship between temperature and mortality, which was never substantiated by WHO despite India’s repeated requests.

In spite of these differences, India continued to collaborate and coordinate with the WHO on this exercise and multiple formal communications (10 times from November 2021 to May 2022) as well as numerous virtual interactions were held with the WHO.

The CRS data of 2020 published by the RGI on May 3, 2022 clearly reveals that the narrative sought to be created based on various modelling estimates of India’s Covid-19 deaths being many times the reported figure is totally removed from reality, the Ministry said while rapping on the WHO’s knuckles.

``We now have actual figures of deaths (i.e. all-cause mortality) for 2020. The historical figures of all-cause mortality for the years 2018 and 2019 are also available in public domain. Since RGI figures capture “all-cause mortality” for a particular year, mortality figures of COVID 19 could at best be considered a subset of the “all-cause mortality” in that year,” the Ministry said.

“Therefore, reliable figures released by the Statutory Authority captured through a rigorous process across the country are presently available for analysis and support in policy planning. It is a known fact that modelling, more often than not, can lead to overestimation and on few occasions, these estimates may stretch to the limits of absurdity,” the Ministry added in a sharp attack on the WHO.