Controversial Covid post

[Statto1]

'I said tracked, I didn't say anything about being controlled, I don't see a QR code running someone's brain, jesus.' - so you implied I said it... Where? Thus the strawman.

You do know that controlled by electronic automation not chips or QR codes running brains right? If not why would you assume it meant that I was saying that?

You're like the god of distraction if I didn't know better that's you're entire modus operandi lest people just have a normal discussion, new member...

What are you going on about? You're just digging yourself into another rabbit hole.

You're the one that keeps posting things irrelevant to my posts, which are mostly posts not directed at you, just don't bother if you can't handle being proven wrong.

It's pointless trying to explain to you, it's like nothing gets past the tin foil.

I've just been posting stats and graphs, and been on the other board since it started "well known member". Even if I hadn't, duration of posting means absolutely zero if you're chatting balls.

 

[cliverd]

I think that’s what you call head in the sand thinking

No, it's quite the opposite. It's following public data and informing yourself.

 

[Alvez_48]

What are you going on about? You're just digging yourself into another rabbit hole.

You're the one that keeps posting things irrelevant to my posts, which are mostly posts not directed at you, just don't bother if you can't handle being proven wrong.

It's pointless trying to explain to you, it's like nothing gets past the tin foil.

I've just been posting stats and graphs, and been on the other board since it started "well known member". Even if I hadn't, duration of posting means absolutely zero if you're chatting balls.

 

[ForssAwakens]

No, it's quite the opposite. It's following public data and informing yourself.

I’d say you are lacking critical thinking

billy gives a great explanation. If you look at the week in isolation then it’s not statistically significant. When you have 55k excess deaths already, would you expect to have an excess death as high as this?

A data point tells you a fact, it doesn’t tell you the story

 

[cliverd]

I’d say you are lacking critical thinking

billy gives a great explanation. If you look at the week in isolation then it’s not statistically significant. When you have 55k excess deaths already, would you expect to have an excess death as high as this?

A data point tells you a fact, it doesn’t tell you the story

If you read my initial post on excess deaths I literally said that there is no doubt that April / March were horrific in terms of excess deaths. As 'infections' have continued to be consistently high 17k + you would think that these would transfer into excess deaths - this has not happened.

After 2 months of extremely high infections and rates a real pandemic would now present a huge number of excess deaths as we saw earlier in the year. We have not seen this and hopefully will not.

If you look at ALL the data from the beginning it's clear to see that the pandemic ended late April as 'no significant' excess deaths have occurred since.

 

[Statto1]

Yep.

Also worth noting that after a previous 'soft' flu season (which we had last year) the following year is likely to see a slight increase in excess deaths. Variable factors are at play in excess deaths so a soft winter often leads to a slight increase the following year.

Not really applicable here though, not as far as excess deaths go.

The end of 2019 (Nov and Dec) was high, 3406 high, beginning of 2020 was low (Jan and Feb), -4105 low, so effectively call this -699
We've wiped out that difference in the week up to Oct 16th, and added another 109.

If you count Oct 19-Feb 20 then it's actually a high death season, as in it's 400 over.

 

[cliverd]

Not really applicable here though, not as far as excess deaths go.

The end of 2019 (Nov and Dec) was high, 3406 high, beginning of 2020 was low (Jan and Feb), -4105 low, so effectively call this -699
We've wiped out that difference in the week up to Oct 16th, and added another 109.

If you count Oct 19-Feb 20 then it's actually a high death season, as in it's 400 over.

Let's wait and see what happens, no point having a discussion when we're essentially living on different planets

 

[ForssAwakens]

If you read my initial post on excess deaths I literally said that there is no doubt that April / March were horrific in terms of excess deaths. As 'infections' have continued to be consistently high 17k + you would think that these would transfer into excess deaths - this has not happened.

After 2 months of extremely high infections and rates a real pandemic would now present a huge number of excess deaths as we saw earlier in the year. We have not seen this and hopefully will not.

If you look at ALL the data from the beginning it's clear to see that the pandemic ended late April as 'no significant' excess deaths have occurred since.

My thoughts on that, is that we weren’t testing as many people. If we had capacity for 300k test in March/April/may applying The same requirements for you to get a test, how many positive tests would we have. My guess would a significant amount more than 20k a day we’ve had for the last week.

Pandemic is not death, it’s transmission of illness, and we are very much in the midst of a global pandemic.

If the pandemic was truly over, you wouldn’t have any weeks with excess deaths without another significant cause. We’ve had a significant week this week and likely to follow at least with another 2/3 weeks of excess deaths based on current admissions to hospital. That is if the correlate to deaths as would be expected given the current evidence.

 

[Statto1]

If you look at ALL the data from the beginning it's clear to see that the pandemic ended late April as 'no significant' excess deaths have occurred since.

Ended? Where has it ended?

These don't look ended:

Excess deaths for the UK is +8% W/E 16th October, and has been trending back up since August.

It's clear that we had an absolutely monumental spike at the very end of the typical "high death" season, then as our lock down, ppe and social distancing helped, this knocked it back during summer, when it's much easier to fight.

Now as we start the bad season again, cases are flying up and we're back to 182 deaths per day, and cases are still on the rise.

The Northern hemisphere has not had a winter with this yet, and people are saying it's over.....strange.

Let's wait and see what happens, no point having a discussion when we're essentially living on different planets

You're not living on our planet, you know the one where we have 400k cases per day, in something that's apparently "over".

You might as well go down James Cook and tell them not to bother, seeing as it's over.

 

[cliverd]

My thoughts on that, is that we weren’t testing as many people. If we had capacity for 300k test in March/April/may applying The same requirements for you to get a test, how many positive tests would we have. My guess would a significant amount more than 20k a day we’ve had for the last week.

Pandemic is not death, it’s transmission of illness, and we are very much in the midst of a global pandemic.

If the pandemic was truly over, you wouldn’t have any weeks with excess deaths without another significant cause. We’ve had a significant week this week and likely to follow at least with another 2/3 weeks of excess deaths based on current admissions to hospital. That is if the correlate to deaths as would be expected given the current evidence.

On testing - yes. We would have had huge numbers of positives

Ended? Where has it ended?

These don't look ended:
View attachment 7940
Excess deaths for the UK is +8% W/E 16th October, and has been trending back up since August.

It's clear that we had an absolutely monumental spike at the very end of the typical "high death" season, then as our lock down, ppe and social distancing helped, this knocked it back during summer, when it's much easier to fight.

Now as we start the bad season again, cases are flying up and we're back to 182 deaths per day, and cases are still on the rise.

The Northern hemisphere has not had a winter with this yet, and people are saying it's over.....strange.



You're not living on our planet, you know the one where we have 400k cases per day, in something that's apparently "over".

You might as well go down James Cook and tell them not to bother, seeing as it's over.

The graphs you've used are the reason this conversation is pointless.

All the best chaps and UTB

 

[1finny]

I think that’s what you call head in the sand thinking

Strange thing to say - I’m passing no judgement on anything. I think that is pointless and leave it to others.
Basically I’m taking the report from today describing it as Not statistically significant.
If the report said it was significantly significant I’d have taken that too.

 

[bear66]

The number may not be statistically significant in that the number might have happened by chance 1 in 100 years. But what is statistically significant is we know the cause of 670 deaths that week.

On a side note, there has been some discussion here on the increase in excess home deaths over the last few months. I hadn't realised that the same was happening in the weeks prior to the large increase in excess deaths in late March.

 

[Billy Horner]

I think i'll follow PHE's quote about not being statistically significant.

That’s absolutely fine. I was merely explaining what the term statistically significant means in this context.

As the excess deaths in the North West, North East & Yorkshire and the Midlands (where virus rates are highest) were found to be statistically significant, I’m presuming that you’ll also take note of that and be suitably concerned?

 

[cliverd]

That’s absolutely fine. I was merely explaining what the term statistically significant means in this context.

As the excess deaths in the North West, North East & Yorkshire and the Midlands (where virus rates are highest) were found to be statistically significant, I’m presuming that you’ll also take note of that and be suitably concerned?

Suitably concerned but not surprised due to the fact these regions escaped the initial wave that ripped through London. Now in London you're seeing low infection rates and low hospital admissions. Previous exposure during the first wave now represented in the data.

 

[cliverd]

The number may not be statistically significant in that the number might have happened by chance 1 in 100 years. But what is statistically significant is we know the cause of 670 deaths that week.

On a side note, there has been some discussion here on the increase in excess home deaths over the last few months. I hadn't realised that the same was happening in the weeks prior to the large increase in excess deaths in late March.

People dying of COVID not with COVID - people scared to attended hospital or having appointments cancelled, thus leading to further excess home deaths.

 

[Statto1]

People dying of COVID not with COVID - people scared to attended hospital or having appointments cancelled, thus leading to further excess home deaths.

Oh jesus, so getting covid and dying within 28 days (or any timeframe) is a massive coincidence?
So you're saying In March/ April more people died of coincidence or immediately died due to not getting a scan, than due to the massive coronavirus infection? Balls, you're talking balls.

The more you lot ignore it's happening, the longer this gets dragged out, and the more people wait at home in fear (although nobody is advising anyone to do this if they think they're going to die).

If you think people are scared now, imagine what it would be like if there was a queue outside the hospital and they stopped letting anyone in.
Who is going to look after the cancer patients and the like, if there's a queue of people outside who can't breathe, or if the ward space is needed for covid.
Do you want to pick who dies out of the covid guy who can't breathe or the heart attack guy? Or do you want to man the ventilator?

There's four main options:

1) Obey the rules, stop questioning everything and thinking it's all a conspiracy, and it will be controlled quicker and easier.

2) Continue as you are and some idiots will continue believe your crap, and this drags out longer, kills more and you get zero benefit.

3) No masks, no lock downs, all the pubs and shops open, with no protection measures, which equals an absolute landslide of death. This option is not going to happen, zero chance.

4) No we can't do the Swedish model, as we're not Sweden, and it didn't work there either. If you're looking in that direction, look at Norway, Finland or Denmark instead.

Maybe this is fake, but it's not even been winter yet either.

 

[ForssAwakens]

The number may not be statistically significant in that the number might have happened by chance 1 in 100 years. But what is statistically significant is we know the cause of 670 deaths that week.

On a side note, there has been some discussion here on the increase in excess home deaths over the last few months. I hadn't realised that the same was happening in the weeks prior to the large increase in excess deaths in late March.

Just as an anecdote to this, there’s been a reduction in people dying in hospital. When you compare deaths at home he deaths in hospital they almost cancel each other out...

 

[ForssAwakens]

View attachment 7948[/QUOTE]
Oh look, a diagram that shows the concept of waves that some people deny

 

[FabioPorkpie]

Read the paper.

Generalisation on coronaviruses is difficult. We have no knowledge of how the common cold appeared and progressed. SARS, MERS and SARS2 have little similarity in infectioness or mortality.

Read the paper to see the graph he uses to discuss progression (deaths close to zero at the end of it). The paper was published on 6 September.

Hi Bear. I’ve just read the paper again. To be honest, there is plenty in there which would appear to correlate with what we are seeing now. They didn’t claim there would be no rise in cases -

‘it is likely there will be local, small and self-limiting mini-outbreaks as areas previously unexposed come into contact with the virus’.

They didn’t claim France would have zero further deaths or hospitalisations, only that rate was normal for the time of year. They also acknowledge that it is only the case at the time of writing -

‘ Specifically, careful examination of the weekly all-causes mortality data in France is completely clear. Six weeks into an apparent surge of cases, the number of deaths remain completely flat and normal, in all age bands (as of mid-August when this document was written).’

They do indeed use lots of supposition and estimated data, but they also acknowledge this each time and explain how they came to that decision and why they think it is justified. They also link to all the relevant research papers and studies, (which I’ll be honest, I’ve not read).

Anyway, there are questions around it for sure, but I don’t think it’s as black and white as you say, especially not the zero further deaths in France given that’s not what they said, and they acknowledged that their info was for a specific time.

Regarding permanently reducing R below 1, yep, I’m not really sure what they are talking about there. Poor choice of phrasing or something else, I honestly don’t know. It makes even less sense, given that they themselves say there will be further small localised outbreaks, so I don’t know how they can predict that but also claim R will stay permanently below 1.

Anyway, long story short I don’t dismiss what that paper says, having re-read it. I think there is a lot of stuff in there that makes sense and as some of these recent localised outbreaks start to drop off in case numbers, does that even add weight to their paper? Who knows, time will tell and it’s going to be interesting to see how it pays out. Obviously, I hope they are correct as that is the best case scenario ie more of us have some immunity already, there will be less deaths and we’ll be through this sooner. Of course, a major question still remains the PCR false positive aspect, and that has implications on both sides of the debate. Neither side has fully convinced me yet.

 

[cliverd]

Oh jesus, so getting covid and dying within 28 days (or any timeframe) is a massive coincidence?
So you're saying In March/ April more people died of coincidence or immediately died due to not getting a scan, than due to the massive coronavirus infection? Balls, you're talking balls.

The more you lot ignore it's happening, the longer this gets dragged out, and the more people wait at home in fear (although nobody is advising anyone to do this if they think they're going to die).

If you think people are scared now, imagine what it would be like if there was a queue outside the hospital and they stopped letting anyone in.
Who is going to look after the cancer patients and the like, if there's a queue of people outside who can't breathe, or if the ward space is needed for covid.
Do you want to pick who dies out of the covid guy who can't breathe or the heart attack guy? Or do you want to man the ventilator?

There's four main options:

1) Obey the rules, stop questioning everything and thinking it's all a conspiracy, and it will be controlled quicker and easier.

2) Continue as you are and some idiots will continue believe your crap, and this drags out longer, kills more and you get zero benefit.

3) No masks, no lock downs, all the pubs and shops open, with no protection measures, which equals an absolute landslide of death. This option is not going to happen, zero chance.

4) No we can't do the Swedish model, as we're not Sweden, and it didn't work there either. If you're looking in that direction, look at Norway, Finland or Denmark instead.

Maybe this is fake, but it's not even been winter yet either.

View attachment 7948

No - not my point. Excess deaths at home are directly related to lockdown / media hysteria and people being unwilling to attend hospital or having appointments cancelled. A reminder that COVID accounted for 1 in 16 deaths during this period.

In regards to your options - personally I have been complying since day one, I haven't broken any of the rules but that doesn't mean I am unwilling to read / form my own opinions based up data. Please don't speak on my behalf that I've been attending the mass rallies / raves / whatever - I haven't. I wear a mask and I follow the rules. Calm it.

Here's an interesting link to hospital acquired COVID - roughly 17% of cases are caught in hospitals.

I also have a question: recently there have been reports of people who haven't left the house / seen anyone they don't live with contracting COVID - how is this happening?

I'm not 'ignoring' what is happening, in fact I'm following it very closely. I think you need to calm down and let people form their own opinions

LINK - https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/probable-healthcare-associated-infections-in-england/