Stop Posting the Conspiracy Rubbish

Ted_DN38416 said:
If you say so. Its very suspicious that multiple vaccines are on the table simultaneously just post US election result. Seems awfully contrived to me
Click to expand...

Again, I don't see the grounds for being suspicious given that the Data Monitoring Committees responsible for establishing when the defined endpoints within the studies have been reached, and releasing their findings of when that has happened, are all working totally independently, both of the companies who designed the vaccines and of each other.
 
T_A_D said:
OK, lets take this point by point.......

Some people who disagree with me actually try to ask questions or post data to back up their own point. You however don't do this and seem to suggest those of use providing publicly available data to support our argument as conspiracy theroists! What exactly is the conspiracy theory we are spreading?

2nd wave? The current excess death level for the UK is at the upper level over a 5 year period.
Click to expand...

Jesus, did you just post a graph showing the max death per week out of any week over 5 years (actually 6 years for week 44, bizarrely), and then post our current trend along that line as acceptable? How evil are you? And how on earth can you try and use that graph as any sort of defence?

Anyway, using those horrendous boundaries:
If you take the high weekly deaths from 16-19, so 4 years (I've not added 2015), and compare that to the 5 year average it's 30k excess deaths.
We're already on 60k excess deaths over 5 years, and we've not really had covid in winter yet.

Anyway, your graph is dated the 10th, but the ONS data for the release on the 10th only goes up to week 44, which is week ending 30th of October.
30th October 7 day av covid deaths: 237, excess this week 11% over the 5 year average
06 Nov 7 day av: 320
13 Nov 7 day av: 404
20 Nov 7 day av: ???? 450 at best?

Seeing as excess death clearly trends in line with covid, where on earth do you think our excess death line is heading?

Your graph, would be laughable if it didn't paint such a $hit picture of our current predicament.

All data below is from ONS, W/E 30th oct, the latest available, posted on 10th Nov. This date goes up the first blue vertical line. I've extended the red line to reflect the increase covid weekly deaths, which is known for two weeks after the 30th. The third and only point after the blue line uses a 450 deaths per day estimate (which I said was coming weeks ago).
My bet is that red line is going to put up that brown line and green line, and they will follow each other quite closely.

1605434035459.png
 
Last edited:
T_A_D said:
A second wave so deadly that the doctors and consultants I personally know at major northern hospitals are still carrying out routine work? Are they busy? Yes. Clearing the backlog of surgery/procedures resulting from a genuine epidemic in the spring (that massive orange spike)? Yes. Are they overwhelmed? Absolutely not. So don't tell me I'm wrong about hospitals just because the people you read about or know offer a different opinion.

I don'y know why you are going on about IFR to me, I have hardly mentioned it recently. I did back in the spring when I believed all the modeling. However, I can now look at real world data and understand how that fits in with some fundamental science.

You'll stick with PCR? I'll assume you are aware of the problems with PCR as a "mass testing" procedure? It is junk for that purpose. The CMO cannot even state the false positive rate
is for goodness sake!! If that can't be done the test is utterly meaningless! Could be 0% false, 10%, 100%. Which is it? It does matter and can be figured out. I can only assume they have chosen not to.

The YouTube video is a public lecture by Chris Whitty, not a conspiracy theory video. In it he explains the actions often taken during a respiratory virus epidemic. One of those quotes was that "airport screening and travel restrictions are utterly pointless" (or pretty much pointless). I posed a simple question as to why we have introduced these measures. The same for masks. The same for track and trace (as it is pointless for a highly infectious respiratory virus, great for other diseases) which was not recommended by WHO until late 2019. Is it unreasonable to ask why?

The role of SAGE is a discussion for a longer thread but you are very naive if you would never question advice to government. The BMJ have just published this (though you'll probably just accuse them of being conspiracy theorists:

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425

I'll just leave you with this Statto..........

The media constantly shoves X number of deaths a day in our faces. We are seeing reports of hundreds of covid deaths a day so maybe a couple of thousand over a week? And yet there is no significant change in excess deaths? If we weren't using a PCR test for which we don't know its limitations would we know anything was out of the ordinary in hospitals in many parts (not all) of the country?
Click to expand...

Quick reply to the rest, but excuse me if I don't give that much time, after that graph you posted as some sort of defence (it was evidence for your prosecution).

I don't think I said they were overwhelmed at the minute? I said we would be overwhelmed if there wasn't a lock down or very strict measures.
You admit they're busy now, yet somehow would not get busier if we just left this to run free? Give your head a shake, saying crap like this and posting the graph you did, loses you what little credibility you have.
I know they've increased the amount of covid wards and ICU beds though, so those beds and staff have had to come from somewhere. Not sure about backlogs, but they had those before, without a pandemic, so I would expect that's not got any easier to clear.

You've looked at data and gone down the rabbit hole, that's fine, good luck with that.

You quoted a post from me, where I wasn't talking to you? :rolleyes: It's not all about you, you know. The post was in general to the nutters, who all agree with each others posts, yet they contradict each other. I wouldn't mind if you all had the same argument, that would work mathematically, but it doesn't. If you all agreed on the points below or had some sort of consensus for "the other side", then it would be simple to debate, but you don't.
Are we immune or not?
Is PCR useful or not?
Is IFR high or low?
Are cases high or low?
Are covid deaths high or low?
Do we have 60k excess deaths or not?
Do we have 40k covid deaths or not?
Have covid deaths gone up in the last month, rapidly?

I expect PCR is not 100%, I don't think anyone says it is? I'm saying it doesn't need to be 100%,. Would rather there were a limited number of false positives, it's better than false negatives. It would be better if we got the results back quicker though.

The PCR test, combined with known contacts and known symptoms will help, it's helping all over the world, we don't have an alternative and there's probably been a billion of these tests taken. You seriously think that a billion tests would have been bought if it was useless?

Each pandemic is different, every one is handled differently, there can be no broad advice that would apply to every one, especially ones that have not yet been discovered. The stance changed on masks as they hadn't really been considered for stopping viral load out, I think they were more looked at for protection previously, but this has been covered a thousand times.
 
Liamo said:
Again, I don't see the grounds for being suspicious given that the Data Monitoring Committees responsible for establishing when the defined endpoints within the studies have been reached, and releasing their findings of when that has happened, are all working totally independently, both of the companies who designed the vaccines and of each other.
Click to expand...

I didnt say i was suspicious because of the data monitoring committee. I Suggested that the timing of all of this seems contrived.
 
Ted_DN38416 said:
I didnt say i was suspicious because of the data monitoring committee. I Suggested that the timing of all of this seems contrived.
Click to expand...
But the data monitoring committees control the timing of any announcement and they work independently. So the timing can't be contrived because no DMC knows what any other one is doing or when they're going to make an announcement.

Also, to a certain extent even the DMC's don't control the timing in some respects. For instance, if a particular interim report (or even final report) can only be made after a certain number of infections is reached, they can't control that because they can't know when people are going to get infected..
 
Liamo said:
But the data monitoring committees control the timing of any announcement and they work independently. So the timing can't be contrived because no DMC knows what any other one is doing or when they're going to make an announcement.

Also, to a certain extent even the DMC's don't control the timing in some respects. For instance, if a particular interim report (or even final report) can only be made after a certain number of infections is reached, they can't control that because they can't know when people are going to get infected..
Click to expand...

So youre saying its all coincidental? If that works for you fair enough. Not for me.
 
GazC_MFC said:
in what sense?
Click to expand...

I guess it would mean far more people have been exposed than previously thought, which would, I guess have an impact on modelling?
It’s weird that it was circulating in Italy last winter but then really exploded in March. Wonder if this strain is actually already a mutation from the original virus from September? I’d have thought the researchers would have established that already, if it was the case.
I read recently that the first known case in U.K. has been traced back to a lady from Essex, end of January, who hadn’t travelled abroad or been in contact with someone from abroad, so it’s thought community transmission in the U.K. was already underway back then.
 
GazC_MFC said:
in what sense?
Click to expand...
It was discussed on here earlier on in the year that the virus has been spreading around the world longer than what was first reported. We were called conspiracy theorists.

If it was around in September last year in Italy it's highly likely that it spread elsewhere around Europe too including over here well before the first reports of it in this country. Throws lots of predictions and stats right up into the air.
 
RandySavage said:
It was discussed on here earlier on in the year that the virus has been spreading around the world longer than what was first reported. We were called conspiracy theorists.

If it was around in September last year in Italy it's highly likely that it spread elsewhere around Europe too including over here well before the first reports of it in this country. Throws lots of predictions and stats right up into the air.
Click to expand...

Poses some difficult questions about actions taken to “protect” everyone if thats true.
 
This is the main finding: people with no symptoms not only were positive after the serological tests but had also antibodies able to kill the virus,” Apolone said.

“It means that the new coronavirus can circulate among the population for long and with a low rate of lethality, not it is disappearing but only to surge again,” he added.

Italian researchers told Reuters in March that they reported a higher than usual number of cases of severe pneumonia and flu in Lombardy in the last quarter of 2019 in a sign that the new coronavirus might have circulated earlier than previously thought.
 
RandySavage said:
It was discussed on here earlier on in the year that the virus has been spreading around the world longer than what was first reported. We were called conspiracy theorists.

If it was around in September last year in Italy it's highly likely that it spread elsewhere around Europe too including over here well before the first reports of it in this country. Throws lots of predictions and stats right up into the air.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I don’t think it has any context on what’s happening now mind
 
RandySavage said:
This is the main finding: people with no symptoms not only were positive after the serological tests but had also antibodies able to kill the virus,” Apolone said.

“It means that the new coronavirus can circulate among the population for long and with a low rate of lethality, not it is disappearing but only to surge again,” he added.

Italian researchers told Reuters in March that they reported a higher than usual number of cases of severe pneumonia and flu in Lombardy in the last quarter of 2019 in a sign that the new coronavirus might have circulated earlier than previously thought.
Click to expand...
Probably explains why Lombardy was one of the only regions that had to make decisions about who dies and who doesn’t
 
GazC_MFC said:
Fair enough, I don’t think it has any context on what’s happening now mind
Click to expand...
Of course it does.
You start to factor in many many more people will have been in contact with a carrier than not for starters.

The government at the start of all this sent out a letter to every household in the country.
Why don't the government send an antibody test and a covid test to every single citizen of the country and then we will know for absolutely certain where the country stands.
 
GazC_MFC said:
Probably explains why Lombardy was one of the only regions that had to make decisions about who dies and who doesn’t
Click to expand...
And is one of the worst hit areas of Italy this Autumn. All these antibodies aren't up to much. 75% of all hospital beds in Lombardy have Covid-19 patients.
 
What constitutes a Covid 19 patient is subjective though. And being married to an Italian lass, i know a little about the country and the current situation. More importantly doesnt all this raise different questions like. If its already been here for over 12 months and went through a winter perhaps at a minimum what we had then isnt what we have now, or what we have isnt as its purported to be?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top