COVID-19

2020 figure for UK is 69 million less 6 million for Scotland, plus growth for 2021 equals 65 million (approx).

As for decimals it is just how I think of percentages as that's how we were taught it at university (it is far quicker). The percentage button on a calculator is for people who don't understand how to use decimals

It ain't exactly rocket science and the important bit is the answer not the workings out.

The govt is knowingly ramping up the test numbers and that ramps up the cases and that ramps up the number of people who would have died any way. But they can then pass them as covid deaths.

The reason people are so anxious is that they're believing what the talking heads on the telly are saying and not doing the maths for themselves.

This is VERY serious as it means we are getting locked down and wearing masks, and having misdiagnosed cancers, and losing jobs and businesses, and young people are committing suicide because people don't understand statistics and so don't understand how the data has been manipilated DELIBERATELY to terrify people for TWO YEARS!

 

You're not understanding the manipilation and how they are using cases.

Consider this.

Someone has a terrible pain in their chest. They go to A&E. They test them for covid. They test positive and so are now admitted to hospital as someone with covid.

Clearly they have been 'hospitalised' with a pain in the chest, but that is not how it gets reported.

On investigating the pain turns out to be a very serious heart condition. The person is rushed into the operating theatre, but they don't make it.

The figures then show that the person was admitted with covid and subsequently died.

And no, I am not making this up. I know two people this has happened to.

This is why for 18 months now they've constantly talked about 'cases'. In all of medical history this talk of 'cases' has never happened. Previously a case was a person ill with a disease.

Using 'cases' makes it very easy to frighten people and manipulate statistics.

 

Have a good Christmas gang. Stay safe.

 

Now I know why I have steered clear of covid threads.

This post is utterly laughable, and I have seen plenty of garbage on the subject.

 

The virus has an incubation period of 28 days so it is reasonable to use this figure

 

Just in case anyone actually wants to understand COVID-19 death certification and stats a little further and see how the examples related to car crashes etc. are fallacy.

Regards.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/deathswherecovid19wasmentionedonthedeathcertificate

https://ukhsa.blog.gov.uk/2020/08/12/behind-the-headlines-counting-covid-19-deaths/

"The World Health Organization (WHO) recognises this complexity and states that:

A COVID-19 death is defined for surveillance purposes as a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case, unless there is a clear alternative cause of death that cannot be related to COVID-19 disease (e.g. trauma)."

 

This is a systematic review of all studies from 2020, so pre vaccine.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8451339/

For a more digestible summary (not referenced I know) this is from Prof Tim Spector who has led the study tracking COVID from app-reported data (not government stats) in the UK. It was produced to debunk the COVID is like flu or the common cold argument often seen. It compares deadliness and infectiousness, the latter pre Omicron of course.

 

oops sorry about above mods - I honestly didn't spot this question and response was not in the main COVID thread. Please do feel free to move.

 

p.s. I'm not aware of a more up-to-date systematic review of studies that isolates vaccinated and unvaccinated over time to take into account improved therapeutics. If you can point me to such I'd be grateful to update on it.

 

If you tested 200,000 people for dandruff, roughly 150 of them would die within 28 days, but it doesn't mean they died because they tested positive for dandruff.

If you give 200,000 people an IQ test 20,000 of them will have an IQ of less than 80. Of those 20,000 roughly 15 will die within 28 days of taking the IQ test, but it doesn't mean they died because they had a low IQ.

People aren't dying because of dandruff or low IQ test results. They're just dying, because a percentage of people are going to die within 28 days, and this has been happening ever since man took his first step on earth.

That's how illogical all of this stuff has become, and just one of the ways how the government is manipulating the data.

 

I'm sure the research has been done Nick, as it does seem an obvious study to do, but the results mustn't have gone in the favour of the vaccine, as if the results had gone in favour of the vaccine it would have been front page news. Pharmaceuticals companies have a long track record of burying results that could damage revenues.

 

I'm not sure that you quite followed what I was saying. I said I wasn't aware of an updated study that looks at the latest case fatality rate in unvaccinated populations that takes into account that we have got better at treating COVID (thereby reducing deaths) since last year. The study I quoted above reviewed all studies from last year. I never said anything about the fatality rate between unvaccinated and vaccinated. I'd reference that too but I really don't believe you're interested in any actual data mate tbh.

 

Have a read of the links I posted earlier. Tell us how they reinforce your argument, or not. Give us some evidence of what you claim? 92% of deaths where COVID mentioned on death certificate due to COVID - that is the ONS (independent to the government's). Government figures only rely on certification after a test i.e. exclude the higher figure where people weren't tested but doctors (a medical professional independent of the government) judged that the cause, yes cause, of death was COVID.

Come on - show us the studies, the stats, the evidence to back up your dandruff and IQ analogy. I'm all eyes and ears.

Prediction - you can't.

Request - please don't reference facebook, twitter, insta, your nan, Elvis from the chippy, or bantam talk.

 

Sorry. I thought you said "I'm not aware of a more up-to-date systematic review of studies that isolates vaccinated and unvaccinated over time" and misunderstood that to mean a study between vaccinated and unvaccinated over time.

Why on earth would I not be interested in actual data?

What's to be gained from insulting people who may have a different view? Alas, it seems that if you don't hold the given narrative (i.e. given by Boris Johnson's govt and big pharma) then you are fair game for being bullied.

I prefer to be open to any and all data Nick, and don't dismiss anything or anyone just because they hold a different view.

 

Why would you show studies for a basic maths calculation that doesn't rely on any virus or vaccine data. That would be a bit weird.

It is simply the number of people who are likely to die within 28 days out of a population of 200,000. That's it

Not the number of people who die of covid, dandruff or low IQ. Just, plain and simple, the number of people who statistically, will die within 28 days out of a sample size of 200,000.

I don't understand why this would need studies, stats or evidence, as it is all pretty basic maths Nick.

 

Isn't the problem with this is the fact that more people are dying this year than they usually do. Same as last year.

Those excess deaths tie in reasonably well with covid deaths.if it isn't related then what is the reason?