Is Elon Musk An "Absolute Hero...
News1 min ago
What Happened To Flu?
We regularly hear at this time of year that the NHS is overwhelmed with cases of flu, but this year I've heard no mention of it. The only figures we get are those related to Coronavirus. Has flu disappeared - or are those figures being lumped in with the daily death toll from Covid?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. 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.
good ferreting, sevenOP. Most of those seem to be advance warnings rather than it actually taking place, though. (The 2017 one sounds particularly alarming, since it was before flu arrived.)
It's right that these warnings should be given. But has it actually happened that numbers of patients, nationwide, have died because the NHS failed to cope?
It's right that these warnings should be given. But has it actually happened that numbers of patients, nationwide, have died because the NHS failed to cope?
// and it shows people can still test positive for up to 90 days after they had it. So, that is a very big window for a false positive too.//
yes - no - the data is out there
I know I am taking this joke thread too seriously - BUT - long covid, they followed up and found a very small proportion were still +ve at 3 mo.
this I would not say was a false positive - it tests for a virus and there was some present
people are saying - yeah only bits, so it is +ve when he is not infectious. plenty of them around, I am +ve for hep B because I have been vaccinated.
[if someone with polio was testing positive 3 mo later I wd conclude they were carrying, and NOT oh it is positive but not infectious, no need to worry again]
sorry to take up your time with tecnical frippery
yes - no - the data is out there
I know I am taking this joke thread too seriously - BUT - long covid, they followed up and found a very small proportion were still +ve at 3 mo.
this I would not say was a false positive - it tests for a virus and there was some present
people are saying - yeah only bits, so it is +ve when he is not infectious. plenty of them around, I am +ve for hep B because I have been vaccinated.
[if someone with polio was testing positive 3 mo later I wd conclude they were carrying, and NOT oh it is positive but not infectious, no need to worry again]
sorry to take up your time with tecnical frippery
I also think that some of those were "boy who cried wolf" When the NHS bed configuration was partially reorganised for some very good reasons and for some less good ones, there was a fair bit of hooraw about it and a rash of "not enough beds" articles. Under normal circs, hospital is not the best place for people once they no longer need 24/7 medical and nursing care. I could go on but this is not the place and we are not in normal circumstances.
Speaking as someone who is recovering from Covid, I cn confirm that my symptoms mirrored flu, and maybe were coupled with that as well, I have no idea.
I have always had serious reservations about listing people as dying from Covid if they tested positive, regardless of any other conditions that may have caused their death within the same timeframe whether they can Covid or not.
If a terminal cancer patient is going to die in two weeks, then catching Covid is not affecting that situation, nor is it going to be the cause of death, but that fatality will still join the Covid stats.
If you extrapolate that situation across the entire range of deaths from underlying causes, it gives a vastly distorted picture of how many people are actually dying from Covid, and who would have died anyway, as opposed to those who have died of Covid, and nothing else.
In my view that artificially inflates the deaths from Covid, and adds to the increasing sense of paranoia and dread that government scientsts seem keen to underline very time they are on television.
I have always had serious reservations about listing people as dying from Covid if they tested positive, regardless of any other conditions that may have caused their death within the same timeframe whether they can Covid or not.
If a terminal cancer patient is going to die in two weeks, then catching Covid is not affecting that situation, nor is it going to be the cause of death, but that fatality will still join the Covid stats.
If you extrapolate that situation across the entire range of deaths from underlying causes, it gives a vastly distorted picture of how many people are actually dying from Covid, and who would have died anyway, as opposed to those who have died of Covid, and nothing else.
In my view that artificially inflates the deaths from Covid, and adds to the increasing sense of paranoia and dread that government scientsts seem keen to underline very time they are on television.
Im sure flu' is still out there and some are still getting ill from it.
but the lack of stats are likely a mixture of:
Extra vigilance with hand washing etc is helping curb flu (it certainly helped reduce norovirus this winter)
It may not be a "bad" flu season
Headlines are made to sell papers - and no one wants to read about flu atm.
but the lack of stats are likely a mixture of:
Extra vigilance with hand washing etc is helping curb flu (it certainly helped reduce norovirus this winter)
It may not be a "bad" flu season
Headlines are made to sell papers - and no one wants to read about flu atm.
apparently it's been a good winter for flu so far - ie not a lot of it about, and more people that usual are getting the jabs
https:/
https:/
But your right in that the 80000+ deaths might actually really only be 75000 for covid as the main cause, on the other hand it could of been 85000 as some might have died in say a care home or at home and not been tested but may have had covid. On the old measure where covid was mentioned on death certificate its nearer 100000
woof and bob - I am not for one minute trying to infer that the Covid pandemic is less serious than it clearly is.
My issue is simply with the way deaths are recorded and advised.
My point is - if someone is going to die, and my cancer patient is a perfect example, then infection with Covid neither alters that situation, or can be used to site Covid as the cause of death - but this is what is happening.
People over eighty stand a higher chance of dying of natural causes than any other demographic in the population - they are also one of the most susceptible groups likely to suffer from infection.
Therefore, in my view, a clear distinction should be made to eliminate people from the statistics who may have suffered Covid within the twenty-eight days prior to their death, but where Covid is clearly not the main factor that caused their death - a terminal cancer patient, someone suffering complications after a fall, and so on, should not be included as Covid deaths, because it is not the specific cause of death.
As for the massive number of people who are hospitalised, a large proportion make a full recovery, and there are far more, and I am included, who have suffered infection, and am on the way to full recovery, with no hospital admission required.
My issue is simply with the way deaths are recorded and advised.
My point is - if someone is going to die, and my cancer patient is a perfect example, then infection with Covid neither alters that situation, or can be used to site Covid as the cause of death - but this is what is happening.
People over eighty stand a higher chance of dying of natural causes than any other demographic in the population - they are also one of the most susceptible groups likely to suffer from infection.
Therefore, in my view, a clear distinction should be made to eliminate people from the statistics who may have suffered Covid within the twenty-eight days prior to their death, but where Covid is clearly not the main factor that caused their death - a terminal cancer patient, someone suffering complications after a fall, and so on, should not be included as Covid deaths, because it is not the specific cause of death.
As for the massive number of people who are hospitalised, a large proportion make a full recovery, and there are far more, and I am included, who have suffered infection, and am on the way to full recovery, with no hospital admission required.
Ellipisis - // If a million people are going to need to be hospitalised, it makes a big difference whether they all go in at the same time or over a long period of time. ..
Indeed - but my issue is with the calculation of causes of death which I believe to be unreasonably inflated by adding in a factor as a cause of death when it is not actually the cause of death at all, merely a parallel occurrence.
Indeed - but my issue is with the calculation of causes of death which I believe to be unreasonably inflated by adding in a factor as a cause of death when it is not actually the cause of death at all, merely a parallel occurrence.
A-H you may indeed have a point re. the inflation of Covid deaths and the methods of notification, but take the big picture..
Rising cases of Covid.
Rising numbers of hospital admissions.
Rising number of deaths.
Many NHS hospitals at maximum capacity.
I think a debate about over exaggerating the death rate due to Covid is insignificant.....even if it exists.
Rising cases of Covid.
Rising numbers of hospital admissions.
Rising number of deaths.
Many NHS hospitals at maximum capacity.
I think a debate about over exaggerating the death rate due to Covid is insignificant.....even if it exists.
jno - // but if you don't think it's Covid causing this sudden outbreak of excess deaths, andy (up 65,000 last year on the five-year average), then what other purely coincidental cause is behind them? //
That's not what I said.
What i said is, I believe the number of deaths attributed to Covid is distorted by attributing any death solely to Covid because the individual has contracted an infection within twenty-eight days.
As the examples I have pointed out clearly indicate - because someone is infected does not mean that the infection was the cause of their death, and I believe that stating that it is the cause inflates the statistics to a level where they are inaccurate.
That's not what I said.
What i said is, I believe the number of deaths attributed to Covid is distorted by attributing any death solely to Covid because the individual has contracted an infection within twenty-eight days.
As the examples I have pointed out clearly indicate - because someone is infected does not mean that the infection was the cause of their death, and I believe that stating that it is the cause inflates the statistics to a level where they are inaccurate.
Sqad - // A-H you may indeed have a point re. the inflation of Covid deaths and the methods of notification, but take the big picture..
Rising cases of Covid.
Rising numbers of hospital admissions.
Rising number of deaths.
Many NHS hospitals at maximum capacity. //
As a current sufferer and with one daughter and son-in-law recovering, and one other daughter and son-in-in-law and grandson infected, I do, I assure you, see the big picture.
// I think a debate about over exaggerating the death rate due to Covid is insignificant.....even if it exists. //
I am not suggesting that there is a debate - I simply made the observation - if a debate ensues, so be it, but that is not within my control, I merely pointed out my concern.
Rising cases of Covid.
Rising numbers of hospital admissions.
Rising number of deaths.
Many NHS hospitals at maximum capacity. //
As a current sufferer and with one daughter and son-in-law recovering, and one other daughter and son-in-in-law and grandson infected, I do, I assure you, see the big picture.
// I think a debate about over exaggerating the death rate due to Covid is insignificant.....even if it exists. //
I am not suggesting that there is a debate - I simply made the observation - if a debate ensues, so be it, but that is not within my control, I merely pointed out my concern.
Latest Posts
Technology1 min ago
ChatterBank2 mins ago
ChatterBank13 mins ago
Asma Al-Assad Cannot Return To The Uk
News17 mins ago
