Social distancing, .. what's that?

[Droogs]

Rorscharch, you really do have alzheimers. we've been here before with the published excess death figures for the first 1/4 of this year and low and behold they were rather much higher than expected. You had a big massive mong on about being pointed out to be wrong

 

[AJB Temple]

I generally keep out of this kind of thing, but I have been trying to work out whether anyone is publishing a credible set of standard deviation statistics for the uk, charting expected deaths in a normal year with flu etc, and this Covid year. I do wonder if Covid has to some extent mainly had an accelerating effect on the vulnerable, leading to skewed statistics. We won't know for another year or so, and we need to get through the winter.

 

[Rorschach]

Rorscharch, you really do have alzheimers. we've been here before with the published excess death figures for the first 1/4 of this year and low and behold they were rather much higher than expected. You had a big massive mong on about being pointed out to be wrong

I've heard new information that the excess death figures are not actually that high. In 2017/18 we had 50,100 excess deaths. Winter 2019/20 was very low for winter deaths so as things stand at the moment we are not looking too bad at all and may end the year with a fairly healthy figure.

 

[Blackswanwood]

I generally keep out of this kind of thing, but I have been trying to work out whether anyone is publishing a credible set of standard deviation statistics for the uk, charting expected deaths in a normal year with flu etc, and this Covid year. I do wonder if Covid has to some extent mainly had an accelerating effect on the vulnerable, leading to skewed statistics. We won't know for another year or so, and we need to get through the winter.

The ONS publish age standardised mortality rates monthly or quarterly which aims to provide a meaningful basis of comparing YOY changes. The data is all downloadable in Excel so easy to manipulate/interrogate.

I am a trustee of a not insignificant pension scheme and the view of the scheme actuary (he’s an extrovert as he looks at your shoes rather than his own when talking to you) is that we just don’t know.

 

[DrPhill]

Check this out:
https://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/threads/new-ignore-feature.124672/#post-1380664

Thanks Angie. That was quick.

 

[Rorschach]

I generally keep out of this kind of thing, but I have been trying to work out whether anyone is publishing a credible set of standard deviation statistics for the uk, charting expected deaths in a normal year with flu etc, and this Covid year. I do wonder if Covid has to some extent mainly had an accelerating effect on the vulnerable, leading to skewed statistics. We won't know for another year or so, and we need to get through the winter.

This is a point I have been making for months. We do know for certain that 17/18 had 50,100 excess winter deaths. What we don't know is exactly what caused those winter deaths because we don't test people. If you are old and die in the winter with some kind of respiratory illness (pretty much every old person dies with respiratory problems FWIW) then you are assumed to have flu or something similar and you become a winter death. The difference we have with C19 is that we are testing at a level never even imaginable before, but we are only testing for C19. So if you die in hospital and have tested positive for C19 in the last 28 days then you are classed as a C19 death, but they don't test for anything else. You could have flu as well as C19, but they don't know because they don't test.
We won't get a clear picture for at least a year though when we can compare the excess death figure to previous years, and even then it will be skewed as there will be lockdown related deaths as well added on. It is becoming clear however that at 45k supposed C19 deaths it is really nothing particularly unusual since we didn't even bat an eyelid about 50k winter deaths just 2 years ago.

The current trend of high case numbers (artificially inflated because we continue to increase our testing, if you test, you will find it) and tiny almost non existent deaths is showing C19 for what it really is, a very mild illness that is certainly less deadly that standard flu. For goodness sake the number 1 symptom of C19 is that it has no symptoms, 99% of people who get it don't even know they have had it.

 

[thepeg]

UK commissioner of police stated some time ago that nobody would be fined or arrested for not wearing a mask. i.e. the covid act is unenforceable; therefore every other aspect of the act is unenforceable.

NHS
High consequence infectious diseases (HCID)
Status of COVID-19
As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK.

Actually they recently changed this page, removing the sub-title “Common Cold”.
Wonder why? Perhaps too many people were seeing it!
The same/similar info is on the USA CDC and WHO websites, although more difficult to find.

I agree the virus is real in that it is a coronavirus, as is the common cold and flu. There are countless types of coronavirus of which we have huge numbers of different types present in our bodies every day, it’s perfectly normal. However, for any pathogen to be given a name, it must be identified, isolated and subject to the Pasteur Protocol which identifies its unique characteristics along with the unique symptoms associated with it and subsequent publication of the resultant information.
So where are those findings?
Don’t waste your time trying the non-existant.

It may be time to see this:
Plandemic 2 | INDOCTORNATION
https://www.bitchute.com/video/4u7rt61YeGox/
Others in the series here:
Plandemic Documentary Series
Official Account: Plandemic Documentary Series

 

[thepeg]

The point about testing is that these do not test for COVID19, only for a (any) coronavirus. So as everybody does many types of coronavirus in them, every test should give a positive result. However for workers in health and the police, the results are invariably negative!
Mmmmm.

I am aware of a melon and a mango having been tested both returning positive.
Also new unopened sterile kits sent off and returning positive.
Yet more Mmmmm.

The reason why there is no test for COVID19 is because the patents on COVID19 expressly forbid any form investigation whatsoever of COVID19. Therefore no test can legally be developed anyway.

 

[Coyote]

Coronavirus and influenza are completely different I'm afraid.

And there aren't actually that many coronavirus strains that infect humans. I think it's 7 including Covid-19.

 

[AJB Temple]

The ONS publish age standardised mortality rates monthly or quarterly which aims to provide a meaningful basis of comparing YOY changes. The data is all downloadable in Excel so easy to manipulate/interrogate.

I am a trustee of a not insignificant pension scheme and the view of the scheme actuary (he’s an extrovert as he looks at your shoes rather than his own when talking to you) is that we just don’t know.

Thanks BSW. I had seen the OBS site, including the weekly stats, but I cannot see any way of determining whether over the past 20 years we are really seeing a trend of increased deaths this year that can clearly be attributed to C19. As the summer progresses into autumn, a layered graph does not appear to show a massive spike reaching a higher peak this year than a layered trend from the past two decades. I just looked at it before my post above, purely out of interest, and concluded that the ONS stats tell us almost nothing useful about trends in the cause death or where unexpected deaths has changed radically by age profile. Most deaths are in the elderly and infirm whether C19 is present or not. It is impossible from the statistics to tell if a death was genuinely caused by C19 or if it was just something that was identified as being present at some point prior to death.

Actuaries are a dying breed. Easily capable of replacement by AI software that is just as reliable as actuarial guess work about the statistical probability of history repeating itself adjusted for a variety of assumed trends. I would not wish to be an equity partner in an actuarial consultancy these days. as I watch technology replace me with absolute certainty.

My father always used to say btw that death is usually caused by a shortage of breath. He thought it was quite funny but he had a weird sense of humour (I am asthmatic and he liked to assert it was a not a real problem and "all in the mind". We disagreed on that and indeed most things). He went on to demonstrate his shortage of breath remark by getting pneumonia, which is a common end to Parkinson's, which ruined the end of his life.

 

[Bacms]

@thepeg Can you point me to the information on in fact what on earth is the Pasteur Protocol? It may be true that in the past you needed to isolate and cultivate bacteria in order to identify them but that is rarely the case these days as you now have technologies that don't require them. I have been a data scientist/bioinformatician working with genomics and high throughput sequencing data for the last decade so I really need some more than a conspiracy documentary to believe in any of what you have just posted.

You also mention incorrectly that they test for any corona virus which again is definitely not true, they use a PCR method that relies on unique parts of the genome of the SARS-CoV-2 which have been selected to be unique to the virus by genome comparison with other coronavirus. Here is the link for the protocol you can you are interested which also mentions the specificity of the test versus other "flu" like viruses. https://www.who.int/docs/default-so...-institut-pasteur-paris.pdf?sfvrsn=3662fcb6_2

@Rorschach can you share with us the data that supports that coronavirus is less deadly than influenza? To me, it just seems like you don't really understand the problem here. The issue here was never the death rate of the virus, which I am afraid is still higher than influenza currently estimated around 0.5-0.7%, although with the caveat that estimating accurately is difficult. Of the ones that recover from severe illness the damage done to their lugs is also going to likely affect them long term
But in any case, the problem comes from a novel virus which is highly infectious being exposed to a complete "naive" population, i.e. a population without any known resistance to it. That poses 2 main problems if you let the virus run free too many people will get infected simultaneously putting pressure on the healthcare system and more people will get the disease so more people will die. Hence lockdown measures to control the spread, that also has another advantage as we are likely much better at treating the disease now than at the beginning as more information about what works and what doesn't comes to light.

As for excess deaths, it is difficult to compare data that far back as medicine and treatment have massively changed and improved over the last 20 years. This year does indeed shows an excess death superior to the average of the last 5 years, although has already been mentioned so did 17/18 although over a broader period. It is also pretty difficult to compare the data has this year has been a specially one due to the lockdown, but there is no denying the existence of a late peak on the winter season which correlates to the arrival of COVID-19. The lockdown itself also likely reduced the number of deaths through the normal flu, traffic accidents, injuries and so on but also likely increased deaths related to lack of treatment so it's true effect on excess deaths is difficult to measure.

 

[Rorschach]

Simple data for the death rate, we have thousands of new cases of C19 every day and have done for months, after an initial dubious high death rate, essentially taking out those who didn't die from flu in the past winter which was very mild for flu/winter deaths we are now seeing basically no deaths from C19. If you have 1 death in 1000 that is a case fatality rate of 0.1%, the rate of seasonal flu approximately (it's probably lower for reasons I have covered earlier) well we currently have a death rate far lower than 1 in 1000 as it passes through the population.

 

[Bacms]

If you have 1 death in 1000 that is a case fatality rate of 0.1%, the rate of seasonal flu approximately (it's probably lower for reasons I have covered earlier) well we currently have a death rate far lower than 1 in 1000 as it passes through the population.

You would have to average that over the entire period rather than the last number of cases so that it balances out, in any case, 1/1000 is still false we had less than 1000 new per day until the 25th of August and the number of deaths for those numbers won't be seen for 2/3 weeks so not as simple as dividing one by the other has you always have a delay. Here are the actually estimates until the 2nd of September Mortality Analyses - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center

And you did mention the cases that would likely cause the number to be lower but you also forgot to mention the ones where it would make it go higher, such as COVID-19 deaths where testing hasn't happened.

And again even if the mortality was the same, which we have no data to support it is, it would still mean that about 10% of the infected people would need to hospitalized and a huge number of deaths since contrary to flu where the number of infected per year is lower due to resistance in the population for COVID-19 we have none or very little resistance

 

[Rorschach]

Anybody who dies in hospital has had a C19 test and almost certainly tested positive as it is rife in hospitals. So there is little inflation there. What is absolutely certain though is that there are far more than 1000 new cases everyday, when 99% of people are asymptomatic then the positive tests are a fraction of the real numbers and you are forgetting all the cases that were never tested back when testing capacity was limited, tens of thousands of undiagnosed cases that have been and gone and we have no way of knowing about them because antibodies are not being produced in most people.

This is not a serious disease for at least 99.9% of the population.

 

[Selwyn]

I generally keep out of this kind of thing, but I have been trying to work out whether anyone is publishing a credible set of standard deviation statistics for the uk, charting expected deaths in a normal year with flu etc, and this Covid year. I do wonder if Covid has to some extent mainly had an accelerating effect on the vulnerable, leading to skewed statistics. We won't know for another year or so, and we need to get through the winter.

Lookup Dr John Lee, Carl Heneghan, Alistair Haines etc. Statistics galore on this sort of thing. Sensible people who want the truth not emotion.

Essentially the number of people died without age against them or comorbidities is vanishingly small. We also had a couple of years of low flu deaths so essentially covid (and it may not have been covid as we'd done no post mortems and the tests were not done or are unreliable anyway) may have cleared out a long tail of 80/90 year old plus people who may previously have died from influenza/ pneumonia in the years before.

There isn't really a "normal" flu year. It ebbs and flows.

 

[artie]

You would have to average that over the entire period rather than the last number of cases so that it balances out, in any case, 1/1000 is still false we had less than 1000 new per day until the 25th of August

Just picking this one statement out of your epistle, I don't have time to dissect it all.

No one, but no one has any remote idea of how many cases we have had at any time.

 

[Rorschach]

No one, but no one has any remote idea of how many cases we have had at any time.

Indeed. The case numbers we can treat as a bare minimum at best and the death numbers are likely an inflated maximum.

 

[Selwyn]

Just picking this one statement out of your epistle, I don't have time to dissect it all.

No one, but no one has any remote idea of how many cases we have had at any time.

This is true. The cold reality is that deaths from covid with zero comorbidities appear to be the only reliable indicator. Not from 90 year olds with dementia in a care home dying of "covid" but from those who otherwise appear healthy. And that is not to say 80 year olds in care homes don't matter, they do - but equally we know life exepectancy is limited then

 

[RogerS]

@thepeg Can you point me to the information on in fact what on earth is the Pasteur Protocol? It may be true that in the past you needed to isolate and cultivate bacteria in order to identify them but that is rarely the case these days as you now have technologies that don't require them. I have been a data scientist/bioinformatician working with genomics and high throughput sequencing data for the last decade so I really need some more than a conspiracy documentary to believe in any of what you have just posted.

You also mention incorrectly that they test for any corona virus which again is definitely not true, they use a PCR method that relies on unique parts of the genome of the SARS-CoV-2 which have been selected to be unique to the virus by genome comparison with other coronavirus. Here is the link for the protocol you can you are interested which also mentions the specificity of the test versus other "flu" like viruses. https://www.who.int/docs/default-so...-institut-pasteur-paris.pdf?sfvrsn=3662fcb6_2

@Rorschach can you share with us the data that supports that coronavirus is less deadly than influenza? To me, it just seems like you don't really understand the problem here. The issue here was never the death rate of the virus, which I am afraid is still higher than influenza currently estimated around 0.5-0.7%, although with the caveat that estimating accurately is difficult. Of the ones that recover from severe illness the damage done to their lugs is also going to likely affect them long term
But in any case, the problem comes from a novel virus which is highly infectious being exposed to a complete "naive" population, i.e. a population without any known resistance to it. That poses 2 main problems if you let the virus run free too many people will get infected simultaneously putting pressure on the healthcare system and more people will get the disease so more people will die. Hence lockdown measures to control the spread, that also has another advantage as we are likely much better at treating the disease now than at the beginning as more information about what works and what doesn't comes to light.

As for excess deaths, it is difficult to compare data that far back as medicine and treatment have massively changed and improved over the last 20 years. This year does indeed shows an excess death superior to the average of the last 5 years, although has already been mentioned so did 17/18 although over a broader period. It is also pretty difficult to compare the data has this year has been a specially one due to the lockdown, but there is no denying the existence of a late peak on the winter season which correlates to the arrival of COVID-19. The lockdown itself also likely reduced the number of deaths through the normal flu, traffic accidents, injuries and so on but also likely increased deaths related to lack of treatment so it's true effect on excess deaths is difficult to measure.

Don't get sucked in Bacms....you're trying to reason with the forum Super Troll and his new apprentice 'thepeg'. Put them both on Ignore and save your sanity.

 

[Selwyn]

Don't get sucked in Bacms....you're trying to reason with the forum Super Troll and his new apprentice 'thepeg'. Put them both on Ignore and save your sanity.

You need to stay in your bedroom. You are one of those people who seem to have been waiting for years for the apocalypse. Statistics from people much cleverer than you are adding flesh to the bones of this all the time