Crosswords0 min ago
Does She Have A Point?
https:/
I began reading this article with some scepticism but as I continued & looked at the statistics I found it more & more compelling, does anyone else feel this way?
I began reading this article with some scepticism but as I continued & looked at the statistics I found it more & more compelling, does anyone else feel this way?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Ah the Sweeden comparisson. Trouble is tho they who quote it dont realise how bad there figures are and say they had no lockdown when they did but maybe not as strict as Italy or us or Germany. There death rates are one a the worst in Europe and are far worser than Germany, Holland Ireland, France, Ireland, Wales, Iceland, Norway and to many others to mention. Yes there doing better than England, Spain, Italy but there more popular holiday places than Sweeden. And maybe in Sweeden there just better at testing and tracing or better hospitals or better at following advice and rules on distancing, masks ect
//She gaily leaves out or butchers the fact to suit her argument. She has entirely missed out the facts on excess deaths.//
I don't think she does. Her argument is not that Covid doesn't kill some people. Everybody knows that it does. So do lots of other things but governments do not expect their populations to make huge adjustments to their lives and livelihoods in an effort to prevent them. Yes there have been "excess deaths" as there will always be when comparing anything to an average. The unarguable fact when discussing the death of many elderly victims (90% of victims were aged over 65) is that they simply died from Covid instead of from any of the multitude of other conditions to which older people eventually succumb. The scandal is that those other conditions are not being treated, either among older patients or the young.
I'm pleased to see that there is a growing movement to get this stupid "lockdown" mentality erased. It doesn't work, it is causing immeasurable harm and a different strategy (perhaps "targeted protection") is urgently required.
I don't think she does. Her argument is not that Covid doesn't kill some people. Everybody knows that it does. So do lots of other things but governments do not expect their populations to make huge adjustments to their lives and livelihoods in an effort to prevent them. Yes there have been "excess deaths" as there will always be when comparing anything to an average. The unarguable fact when discussing the death of many elderly victims (90% of victims were aged over 65) is that they simply died from Covid instead of from any of the multitude of other conditions to which older people eventually succumb. The scandal is that those other conditions are not being treated, either among older patients or the young.
I'm pleased to see that there is a growing movement to get this stupid "lockdown" mentality erased. It doesn't work, it is causing immeasurable harm and a different strategy (perhaps "targeted protection") is urgently required.
no
look outside and you will see people died from it
(and to refute NJ's usual and well worn point - who wouldnt have anyway)
can I start a conspiracy theory that there are conspiracy theorists trying to shove bother covid and compulsory lesbianism up my nose on Thursday afternoons?
* last bit from late Geoffrey Dicken House of Commons - *;are the children going to have compulsory lesbianism shoved down their throats? he asked - quite appropriately outraged
look outside and you will see people died from it
(and to refute NJ's usual and well worn point - who wouldnt have anyway)
can I start a conspiracy theory that there are conspiracy theorists trying to shove bother covid and compulsory lesbianism up my nose on Thursday afternoons?
* last bit from late Geoffrey Dicken House of Commons - *;are the children going to have compulsory lesbianism shoved down their throats? he asked - quite appropriately outraged
This is a long read...not paywalled, and is food for thought.
https:/
https:/
A better point is that the focus on excess deaths is only part of the picture anyway. It's clear that many who've suffered from the disease without actually dying have suffered serious damage to their lungs in particular, although exactly what the effects are of Covid in the long-term will take time to discover fully.
Nevertheless, Covid-19 is a disease that both kills somewhere in the region of 1 in 200 people and has the potential to spread very widely indeed, if ignored. 1 in 200 is still a lot.
Nevertheless, Covid-19 is a disease that both kills somewhere in the region of 1 in 200 people and has the potential to spread very widely indeed, if ignored. 1 in 200 is still a lot.
I also come across this on my search for facts.
""The COVID-19 test is called an RT PCR lest which stands tor Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction, It was invented by an American bio-chemist in 1984 by the name of Kary Mulls. The test does not test for a virus, it tests for genetic material only. Genetic material is found inside every living human being on the face of the planet. What RT PCR does is take genetic material and amplifies it In other words makes It larger. If I test myself with RT PCR and put the settings to say 30/35 cycles of amplification I will test negative but If I test myself again at say 60/65 cycles of amplification than I will test positive and so will everyone else. It is because now I have brought so much genetic material to the forefront it will detect it all.
The cycle of amplification dictates the number of positive test results you get. It is important to note the inventor of this test Kary Mulls stated his test cannot be used to diagnose infectious diseases at all. He died last year at the age of 74 and was well aware that the powers that be wanted to use his test to test for COVID-19.""
""The COVID-19 test is called an RT PCR lest which stands tor Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction, It was invented by an American bio-chemist in 1984 by the name of Kary Mulls. The test does not test for a virus, it tests for genetic material only. Genetic material is found inside every living human being on the face of the planet. What RT PCR does is take genetic material and amplifies it In other words makes It larger. If I test myself with RT PCR and put the settings to say 30/35 cycles of amplification I will test negative but If I test myself again at say 60/65 cycles of amplification than I will test positive and so will everyone else. It is because now I have brought so much genetic material to the forefront it will detect it all.
The cycle of amplification dictates the number of positive test results you get. It is important to note the inventor of this test Kary Mulls stated his test cannot be used to diagnose infectious diseases at all. He died last year at the age of 74 and was well aware that the powers that be wanted to use his test to test for COVID-19.""
// "If you've had Covid 19 & get run over by a bus, Covid 19 what is going on death certificates//
er yes
and if you had chronic lung disease or a heart transplant that might well go in Part II ( no I am not going to explain everyone knows apparently. suffice it only to say there is a Part II)
and if you had diabetes it certainly should (sight problems)
so that doctor should stop making possy little points to the masses who dont know their way around a DC and how unehlpful death certification is in these circumstances ( hence the excess deaths bit). The fdoctor should get on with writing out all those extra death certs from the people who havent died from covid ( he alleges)
as the great (there is no covid ) lawyer wd agree:
if I put as cause of death - the heart stopped!
the coroner or his man would be after me
and even more after me if he asked as a supplementary
you didnt say he had been stabbed - - frooder heart !
oh say I - I didnt think that was relevant
would the great lawyer agree with me
or would he say - - take him dooooooown !
the doctors have rules and have to follow them
er yes
and if you had chronic lung disease or a heart transplant that might well go in Part II ( no I am not going to explain everyone knows apparently. suffice it only to say there is a Part II)
and if you had diabetes it certainly should (sight problems)
so that doctor should stop making possy little points to the masses who dont know their way around a DC and how unehlpful death certification is in these circumstances ( hence the excess deaths bit). The fdoctor should get on with writing out all those extra death certs from the people who havent died from covid ( he alleges)
as the great (there is no covid ) lawyer wd agree:
if I put as cause of death - the heart stopped!
the coroner or his man would be after me
and even more after me if he asked as a supplementary
you didnt say he had been stabbed - - frooder heart !
oh say I - I didnt think that was relevant
would the great lawyer agree with me
or would he say - - take him dooooooown !
the doctors have rules and have to follow them
Urgh, she has been a lockdown sceptic all along and retweets Toby Young and JHB (oh the shame). Just trying to spin another yarn from her inner mind - column inches innit. Doesn't even deserve being heard because, as you'll note, she holds back from calling it a conspiracy or a great hoax and merely lay's claim to everyone (else) being stupid.
Ha. That dr Yeadon. The one who said last month that thered be no second wave so scientists were useless. He still say's the pandemic is over for most of england. He say's its not 7% whose had corons as scientists say but 35% cos he worked it out on the back of a envelope. Of course his no authoritey. More qualified experts dont agree with him at all. Just another blogger who wants to make a name for hisself because he can't cut it in the profession.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|