35,000 excess cancer deaths

View attachment 7471
and that's just cancer deaths, chuck in excess deaths due to suicides, heart attacks etc. all for a respiratory disease that attacks the old and the vulnerable and kills .05% of those infected with an average age of 80+
A covid death is not more important than any other death and therefore the measures are disproportionate, protect the old and vulnerable and the rest of us need to get on with our lives or we are screwed.
pretty myopic view. Those 20k, some may get symptoms and still get diagnosis and treatment just later through referral rather than screening.
Also if we didn't lock down:
a) the numbers seem high, about 8% of cancer screening ends up with a diagnosis?
b) sick hospital staff would reduce capacity to provide treatment and screening, so at least a % of 20k still would not get screened and even more would not get treatment
c) no lockdown means that people with cancer and other illness would be much more likely to catch covid and a number of those would die due to immune deficiency, particularly those on chemotherapy
d) the requirement for various drugs to support the capacity for covid testing would skyrocket, leaving smaller capacity for cancer screening tests

You see this is all much more complex than you have detailed here, with your simplistic one sided link.
 
Last edited:
On ch4 news last week a stupid cow said treatments were all open and ongoing. My cancer grew back to origional size so 2 and a half years and 58 chemos gone in 16 weeks i was told my trestment had to stop. I emailed ch4 n got nowt back. Dunno who she was but i know what she is.
 
pretty myopic view. Those 20k, some may get symptoms and still get diagnosis and treatment just later through referral rather than screening.
Also if we didn't lock down:
a) the numbers seem high, about 8% of cancer screening ends up with a diagnosis?
b) sick hospital staff would reduce capacity to provide treatment and screening, so at least a % of 20k still would not get screened and even more would not get treatment
c) no lockdown means that people with cancer and other illness would be much more likely to catch covid and a number of those would die due to immune deficiency, particularly those on chemotherapy
d) the requirement for various drugs to support the capacity for covid testing would skyrocket, leaving smaller capacity for cancer screening tests

You see this is all much more complex than you have detailed here, with your simplistic one sided link.
Why not broaden this view and give us your take on the numbers - even taking into account your points - are the numbers not still in the thousands and therefore of concern and my point was that this is just cancer deaths.
 
  1. The test isn't useless, but your brain is.
  2. There has been an increase in deaths, which is proven (speak to a cemetery or the crematoriums if you disagree)
  3. At the peak, Covid was MORE than the deaths of everything else combined! (maybe ask some nurses that work at James Cook or North Tees if you disagree)
  4. Had we no locked down, the deaths would certainly have been worse, not better! (just look at the graphs)
  5. An increase in deaths has followed an increase in positive tests for the last 8 months, everywhere in the world (maybe they're all in on it huh?).
  6. A decrease in positive tests equals a decrease in deaths, everywhere in the world (maybe they're all in on it huh?).
  7. Death and test rates are different to March/ April, as we were not doing enough testing back then (we're still not doing enough now either mind).
  8. The test works, and is a good marker for gathering information on likely infections, infection rates and likely potential deaths for various scenarios.
Is the test 100% accurate? No
Does the test need to be 100% accurate to be effective? No
Do you need to do the right things with the data, to be effective? Yes
Are we doing the right things? No
Why aren't we doing the right things? Because we have an inept government, and a load of idiot people that voted them in, that don't like listening to experts.

Your argument disagrees with itself by the way. The WHO are saying don't rely on lockdowns (AS THE PRIMARY CONTROL), as in they're saying use test and trace instead (you know, the tests you say don't work, and the trace system that doesn't work), and then wear masks and socially distance etc.

Of course lock downs are bad for the economy, nobody in the entire world doubts this. But there are some that come out of it in a lot better position than others, and I'll bet my hat that it's the selfish ones that voted these selfish idiots in (on average).
Still think my brains useless?
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab says the "challenge" with testing for covid19 in airports is 'the very high false positive rate' and adds 'only 7% of tests will be successful in identifying those who have the virus'.

The inventor of the PCR test kit said that it was not designed for covid 19, and that our bodies probably have small parts of just about anything - Google is your friend.
 
Still think my brains useless?
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab says the "challenge" with testing for covid19 in airports is 'the very high false positive rate' and adds 'only 7% of tests will be successful in identifying those who have the virus'.

The inventor of the PCR test kit said that it was not designed for covid 19, and that our bodies probably have small parts of just about anything - Google is your friend.

Yes, I do, I think your brain is useless for this conversation. You don't seem to have any ability of putting information together and using it in the best way, or even an adequate way.

Raab? If you're going to quote someone, quote someone who actually has some credibility.

The transistor wasn't designed to be used in computer chips (seeing as it was invented before computer chips), but that doesn't stop each computer chip now using 10 billion transistors to great effect. If you asked any of the guys who had a hand in inventing the transistor, they wouldn't have a clue about it's use in computer chips.
The wheel wasn't designed to be used on cars (seeing as it was invented about 5,000 years ago), but it's still quite effective today. The bloke that invented the wheel is not qualified to talk about it's use in cars.

Things can be very good at doing a job that they were not originally intended for, and sometimes that's all you have, which is certainly better than nothing, in the vast majority of cases.

Also, a bit of fact checking on your PCR claim, which is also false, partly because the bloke who invented it died in August 2019 (before Covid 19), and also because of the below:
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-f...cant-be-used-in-virus-detection-idUSKBN24420X
Also, with further digging, the guy you're on about (Kary Mullis) also started to lose his way a bit later in life, making some wild claims outside his area of expertise, including "HIV does not lead to AIDS", "I believe in Astrology" and "Climate change does not exist" and "the ozone layer is not being depleted". So, even if he did say it (which he didn't, and because he was dead), then it's unlikely his opinion is as valid as the guys who designed the actual tests based on the current criteria and circumstances.

So, it seems, google might be your friend, but it's also widely open to incorrect interpretation, and can also be full of $hit too.

From 2019 to present
Has the number of UK deaths increased, over a typical average year? Yes, about 60k over, mainly from March/ April/ May (outside of flu season btw)
Has the number of covid influenced deaths increased? Yes
Did testing show more positives or less positives as the death rate was going up? More (test works)
Did testing show more positives or less positives as the death rate was going down? Less (test works)
Did death rate increase, follow test positive increase? Yes (test works)
Did death rate decrease, follow test negative increase? Yes (test works)

Or,

It's all a massive coincidence, the entire world is in on it and all the nurses, doctors and care home staff are lying.
 
I think by your tone that you think a suitable response to me providing information for discussion, is to try to discredit it by belittling it.
A couple of times you have chucked in conspiratorial elements again to discredit.
I quoted Raab as he was on a mainstream media source - this is accepted more by most, does this offer credibility? it is a clip of Professor Carl Heneghan giving evidence to the Science and Technology committee in Parliament on 17/09/20 stating that a cycle threshold of above 35 are generally people who are not infectious.
It is in reply to a FOI request which again makes interesting reading.
Piece these things together and it is clear the test is useless.
 
Why not broaden this view and give us your take on the numbers - even taking into account your points - are the numbers not still in the thousands and therefore of concern and my point was that this is just cancer deaths.
I don't need to broaden it, it's your statement. I've highlighted the issues the lack of objectivity. Do your research and come back with something grounded in a bit more of a balanced view, and we can talk about that. That is how the scientific theory works. You come out with a hypothesis, test it with your peers then re-asses your hypothesis.
 
I think by your tone that you think a suitable response to me providing information for discussion, is to try to discredit it by belittling it.
A couple of times you have chucked in conspiratorial elements again to discredit.
I quoted Raab as he was on a mainstream media source - this is accepted more by most, does this offer credibility? it is a clip of Professor Carl Heneghan giving evidence to the Science and Technology committee in Parliament on 17/09/20 stating that a cycle threshold of above 35 are generally people who are not infectious.
It is in reply to a FOI request which again makes interesting reading.
Piece these things together and it is clear the test is useless.

You're not talking sense, and you're also posting non-factual information, which is why it's easily belittled.
You've quoted things which are simply not true.
You said "The inventor of the PCR test kit said that it was not designed for covid 19 " - he didn't say that, and he died before Covid 19 was even in China.
That's not a conspiracy theory, unless you think he came back from the dead?
The same bloke however did have some other conspiracy theories, which a panel of experts would classify as "bull$hit".
If the test was useless, then the entire world would not be spending trillions on the tests.
Being on a mainstream media source does not mean credibility, just like something being on google may not be real/ true etc.

I'm no expert, but if they're using threshold over 35 then they might be be being too sensitive with the results, it doesn't mean the test is useless or doesn't work. I would rather they were more sensitive with the results than less sensitive, normally doctors, nurses and health experts tend to air on the side of caution, it keeps more people alive, which is a good thing, I would say.
 
Last edited:
No takers for my daily deaths service? What we gonna do about the million people that will die the week after covid ceases to exist? They need their stories telling. Especially those that are children. 15000 of them a day, so they say. Over 5 million children under 5 in 2017, allegedly. Meanwhile great swathes of the country think we should cut foreign aid, and ive seen this argued on this very site(albeit the old version). Same load of nutters think bill gates is an alien lizard for trying to prevent many of these deaths.
why do the masses suddenly care about every single death after years of blissful ignorance towards anyone outside of their immediate family? Because they’re being told to!
Oh well. Fine by me. So long as after corona we go after those responsible for blowing legs off kids. Might take a hit on the old balance sheet, owld Britannia. But we’ll all be behind it, caring souls we now are.
 
No takers for my daily deaths service? What we gonna do about the million people that will die the week after covid ceases to exist? They need their stories telling. Especially those that are children. 15000 of them a day, so they say. Over 5 million children under 5 in 2017, allegedly. Meanwhile great swathes of the country think we should cut foreign aid, and ive seen this argued on this very site(albeit the old version). Same load of nutters think bill gates is an alien lizard for trying to prevent many of these deaths.
why do the masses suddenly care about every single death after years of blissful ignorance towards anyone outside of their immediate family? Because they’re being told to!
Oh well. Fine by me. So long as after corona we go after those responsible for blowing legs off kids. Might take a hit on the old balance sheet, owld Britannia. But we’ll all be behind it, caring souls we now are.
Yes but cases, from a dodgy test BE AFRAID!!!
 
I think by your tone that you think a suitable response to me providing information for discussion, is to try to discredit it by belittling it.
A couple of times you have chucked in conspiratorial elements again to discredit.
I quoted Raab as he was on a mainstream media source - this is accepted more by most, does this offer credibility? it is a clip of Professor Carl Heneghan giving evidence to the Science and Technology committee in Parliament on 17/09/20 stating that a cycle threshold of above 35 are generally people who are not infectious.
It is in reply to a FOI request which again makes interesting reading.
Piece these things together and it is clear the test is useless.

Absolutely. This whole sorry charade is going to come crashing down. When it begins Hancock, Johnson, SAGE scientists (completely unaccountable! They should be tried in a criminal court of law for negligence for what they are doing). The trouble is some people don't like to admit they're wrong, but when enough do, the card tower will fall.

Testing is utterly utterly pointless when an a respiratory virus becomes endemic (everywhere). It peaked here in March before anything got going. Contact tracing would be like a cat chasing it's tail. Yet we have prominent WHO connected "health professors" advocating it and saying we should suppress the virus until a vaccine, lunacy! Contact tracing works for things like Ebola where the patient is immobile when infectious but not for a respiratory virus. I was duped but have seen the light. When others do too and they realise they have lost family, businesses, communities..... the anger will come and inept, corrupt, and dangerous scientists will face their reckoning.

The scary thing is there are some very well educated people who actually believe all this! A prof I knew quite happily bouncing around the 90% susceptible figure on twitter (I'll be replying later, I suspect his ego will be too big to backtrack on his position but he's smart enough to realise when presented with data rather than just blindly reading the media). 100% susceptible used in Fergusons modelling and he has the cheek to come out today and defend it. The guy is a fraud!!! SAGE will only be able to hold out for so long when the ship does finally go down.

This has been a seasonal coronavirus the of which has passed through the human race for eons. Their pattern of infection is well understood and varies in shape depending on geographical location (curve for northern european countries is different to south american countries). Once endemic which it always becomes because you can't test quickly enough and it runs through the population regardless of measures. Yet we have wasted billions of taxpayers money on a futile excercise.

I have shown people the graphs on here from this epidemic. It is plain as day. We were told this by someone on here back in feb/early march, most shot him down (me included). I can admit I was hideously lied to by the media, the government, but most of all by fellow scientists. Fortunately there are scientists out there now actively fighting to raise this to prominence because it is getting hidden in a fog of utter nonsense and hysteria from the gutter press (that is every single outlet, all useless).

Science has been dragged into the dark ages by these fools.

SAGE needs to come out and justify (it can't) 7% immunity garbage. It is what the whole thing is based on. When people realise this untruth they will realise there were never ever going to be hundreds of thousands of deaths. Put pressure through social media outlet and through your MP. It's crucial, as someone else pointed out on another thread you'll be in lockdown continuously otherwise. Educate yourself. I can point you in the direction of the relevant information.
 
TAD,

That's too much to quote, but without testing, there is no tracing, even with the UK's **** system. It was the testing (albeit low) and following advice of isolating when being in contact with the symptomatic which stopped the initial peak. The virus was effectively slowed with visual tests and known symptoms, and aided with an actual test (in some cases).

If you don't test then you don't know who has it but is asymptomatic, if you don't know that then we wouldn't have an R of 1.3, it would be 2-3 times that.

We do not have the capacity in the NHS not to test (and believe the testing), trace and follow guidance on washing hands and masks etc.

Knowing symptoms gets you to stage 1 - minor slowing of spread
Self isolating if you have met someone with symptoms gets you to stage 2 - further slowing of spread
Testing gets you to stage 3 - further slowing of spread
Tracing gets you to stage 4 - further slowing/ stopping of spread
Prevention gets you to stage 5 - stopping/ eradication

If any of those fail, then you end up resorting to lockdowns to get you back to a manageable level, or to stop the NHS being overwhelmed.

Our stage 1-3 is actually quite good compared to the rest of the world (finally), but our stage 4 and 5 is F***ing horrendous, as is the behaviour of our public.

Testing works, it's proven to work, but it can only get you so far, it has to be backed up by tracing and prevention, it's just a piece in the puzzle.

Just because we have an overwhelmed tracing system, or a non-functioning tracing system does not mean the testing does not work, it just means it won't have as efficient an effect as it could do (in the hands of a decent government, or well mannered/ behaving population).

The test could improve from 80% to 100%, but it's pointless having that increase if tehre is no more testing, or if tracing goes down from 80% to 40% and you don't take any prevention measures during an outbreak (ie leave the schools and pubs open, or delay lock downs).

If we stopped testing, then we would be $hit at stages 3,4 and then 5. Which means we go back to relying on stage 1 and 2, and that equals an overwhelmed NHS.

If the NHS gets overwhelmed then all staff go and treat the current threat, that's the 500 people coming through the door needing ventilators, and have zero time or resources to look at any future threats (people missing cancer appointments etc). The people who can't breathe have to be treat first, it's just the way it is. It's like if an ambulance went to a car crash, they would treat the bloke with his leg hanging off or the bloke not breathing before even asking if anyone thought they had cancer or another potential illness. There isn't the capacity in the NHS to let the virus run amok (which is what happens if we don't test and leave everything open) and treat everyone else at the same time.
 
Absolutely. This whole sorry charade is going to come crashing down. When it begins Hancock, Johnson, SAGE scientists (completely unaccountable! They should be tried in a criminal court of law for negligence for what they are doing). The trouble is some people don't like to admit they're wrong, but when enough do, the card tower will fall.

Testing is utterly utterly pointless when an a respiratory virus becomes endemic (everywhere). It peaked here in March before anything got going. Contact tracing would be like a cat chasing it's tail. Yet we have prominent WHO connected "health professors" advocating it and saying we should suppress the virus until a vaccine, lunacy! Contact tracing works for things like Ebola where the patient is immobile when infectious but not for a respiratory virus. I was duped but have seen the light. When others do too and they realise they have lost family, businesses, communities..... the anger will come and inept, corrupt, and dangerous scientists will face their reckoning.

The scary thing is there are some very well educated people who actually believe all this! A prof I knew quite happily bouncing around the 90% susceptible figure on twitter (I'll be replying later, I suspect his ego will be too big to backtrack on his position but he's smart enough to realise when presented with data rather than just blindly reading the media). 100% susceptible used in Fergusons modelling and he has the cheek to come out today and defend it. The guy is a fraud!!! SAGE will only be able to hold out for so long when the ship does finally go down.

This has been a seasonal coronavirus the of which has passed through the human race for eons. Their pattern of infection is well understood and varies in shape depending on geographical location (curve for northern european countries is different to south american countries). Once endemic which it always becomes because you can't test quickly enough and it runs through the population regardless of measures. Yet we have wasted billions of taxpayers money on a futile excercise.

I have shown people the graphs on here from this epidemic. It is plain as day. We were told this by someone on here back in feb/early march, most shot him down (me included). I can admit I was hideously lied to by the media, the government, but most of all by fellow scientists. Fortunately there are scientists out there now actively fighting to raise this to prominence because it is getting hidden in a fog of utter nonsense and hysteria from the gutter press (that is every single outlet, all useless).

Science has been dragged into the dark ages by these fools.

SAGE needs to come out and justify (it can't) 7% immunity garbage. It is what the whole thing is based on. When people realise this untruth they will realise there were never ever going to be hundreds of thousands of deaths. Put pressure through social media outlet and through your MP. It's crucial, as someone else pointed out on another thread you'll be in lockdown continuously otherwise. Educate yourself. I can point you in the direction of the relevant information.
That's quite some arrogance there TAD
 
@Statto1 @Laughing , would it be fair to assume that the vast majority of the population have already had it?
Reason I ask this as it's becoming known the virus was starting to fly around Europe as far back as November last year. If the virus is as contagious as we are told it is (airborne, surviving for days on end on surfaces etc) you don't have to a scientist to come to the common sense conclusion it's been everywhere. Climate obviously plays a huge part in all of this too as seen by the cases falling when the weather was superb and rising again when it started getting colder, none of these inside outside ventilation excuses.

Thoughts?
 
@Statto1 @Laughing , would it be fair to assume that the vast majority of the population have already had it?
Reason I ask this as it's becoming known the virus was starting to fly around Europe as far back as November last year. If the virus is as contagious as we are told it is (airborne, surviving for days on end on surfaces etc) you don't have to a scientist to come to the common sense conclusion it's been everywhere. Climate obviously plays a huge part in all of this too as seen by the cases falling when the weather was superb and rising again when it started getting colder, none of these inside outside ventilation excuses.

Thoughts?
How many times have you had the flu in your lifetime?
 
Assume whatever you want RS. I wouldn't want a major public health decision made based on an assumption though.
 
How many times have you had the flu in your lifetime?
That's quite a personal question @bear66 what's your STI status 👀?

Oh I don't know, flu? Pneumonia? Had that when I was 5 years old, 3 night stay in the old Middlesbrough General, left a tiny scar on one of my lungs, left me quite susceptible to chest infections during my teenage years, haven't had one since I was 16 mind. Probably had the flu before, hasn't everybody?. Definitely had man flu, usually following excessive Xmas celebrations 😀
 
Back
Top