Jump to content

  • OVF player sponsorship 2022

    £10 to enter. More details and a link to donate can be found here

Coronavirus


robf

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, valeparklife said:

It's nearly impossible to know exactly how many people have died as a direct result of COVID.

There is a momentous difference between dying from COVID and dying with COVID.

It even says on the Government website "Deaths within 28 days of positive test". It's literally hidden in plain sight.

If I have a positive COVID test, recover, then 28 days later have a heart attack, I would be recorded as a "COVID death".

And you genuinely believe that there are 10s of thousands of cases where someone with covid died of a heart attack/getting run over?

If I have a weak heart and I get run over by a car and it causes me to die of a heart attack what would you say killed me? I am guessing you are saying the car played no part at all in the death? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


There's no question covid deaths have been exaggerated on the figures. To what extent who knows but the govt have clearly employed the fear tactic via the media from day 1.  I believe every death where covid can be the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc reason on the death certificate are included in the UK figures.  I don't know if it's still the case but some other countries in Europe(perhaps all) don't report the same, just those where covid was the first cause. 

I know of at least 2 locally to me(even in a rural area like Shropshire which has low numbers compared to city areas).  One was a lady who was basically a raging alcoholic, liver shot to pieces and had been in and out of hospital the last 3 months of her life.  She tested positive on the last occasion she went in(with no covid symptoms) and passed away.  Her family were initially questionning the fact she was included as covid death when it clearly wasn't and were told Doctors have been told to put it on if a positive test or even symptoms are present and no positive. 

Magnify that nationally and who knows to what extent as I said above, I guess we will never know?

Obviously covid can exacerbate people's underlying conditions and hasten death in some cases I don't think anyone can deny that, but there has undoubtedly been some "cooking of the books" going on for want of a better phrase.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, WV said:

And you genuinely believe that there are 10s of thousands of cases where someone with covid died of a heart attack/getting run over?

If I have a weak heart and I get run over by a car and it causes me to die of a heart attack what would you say killed me? I am guessing you are saying the car played no part at all in the death? 

Cause of death heart attack.

Contributing factor the RTA.

The make and colour of the vehicle is irrelevant, the fact you had a covid test within 28 days is also irrelevant. 

On average there are 400 cancer deaths per day in the UK.  If just 10% of those people had a covid test within 28 days it would account for approximately 14,600 covid death statistics.

604,000 deaths were recorded in 2019 in the UK. If 20% had received a covid test within 28 days 128,000 statistics would have been recorded to the covid death numbers.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, geosname said:

Cause of death heart attack.

Contributing factor the RTA.

The make and colour of the vehicle is irrelevant, the fact you had a covid test within 28 days is also irrelevant. 

On average there are 400 cancer deaths per day in the UK.  If just 10% of those people had a covid test within 28 days it would account for approximately 14,600 covid death statistics.

604,000 deaths were recorded in 2019 in the UK. If 20% had received a covid test within 28 days 128,000 statistics would have been recorded to the covid death numbers.

Where do you get 20% from? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WV said:

And you genuinely believe that there are 10s of thousands of cases where someone with covid died of a heart attack/getting run over?

If I have a weak heart and I get run over by a car and it causes me to die of a heart attack what would you say killed me? I am guessing you are saying the car played no part at all in the death? 

Of course there would be. Please read my post again. The Government literally explains what constitutes a 'death' on their website.

To add to this, Yoon K Loke and Carl Heneghan, of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford University, wrote “It seems that PHE regularly looks for people on the NHS database who have ever tested positive, and simply checks to see if they are still alive or not. PHE does not appear to consider how long ago the Covid test result was, nor whether the person has been successfully treated in hospital and discharged to the community.”

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/why-no-one-can-ever-recover-from-covid-19-in-england-a-statistical-anomaly/

The World Heath Organisations literally defines a 'COVID death' as "a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness, in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case".

"Probable"!

So you can die without even having a positive COVID test and your death could still be recorded as a "COVID death".

The WHO also explain how they record COVID on a death certificate: 

"COVID-19 should be recorded on the medical certificate of cause of death for ALL decedents where the disease caused, or is assumed to have caused, or contributed to death".

"Assumed"!

So no actual proof is required to have COVID on a death certificate.

https://www.who.int/classifications/icd/Guidelines_Cause_of_Death_COVID-19.pdf?ua=1

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


3 hours ago, valiant_593 said:

Stop posting this. Just because people die from other things Dosent mean a new virus that has killed nearly 130000 shouldn’t be prioritised. I new virus, nobody knew just how deadly it could be and judging by the first few months it was horrific. I know because you don’t think it’s been deadly we should have just done nothing and let even more die, and many more would have died if not for lockdown, hospitals were over run as it was Nevermind if lockdown didn’t take place. Of course everyone cares about other deaths what an odd thing to say. But that Dosent mean a new virus proven to kill people shouldn’t be prioritised! The issue that you ignore is that this virus was contagious and many other illnesses are not hence why it was treated so seriously. The focus on covid was right at the time, I do agree that now and for quite some time hospitals do need to amend that focus as cancer patients are having surgery postponed  

 

Really don’t like this argument. LV has been saying loads of people die every year from flu. Now is that actually from flu or did they just have flu and they actually died from something else? The point is that flu would have contributed and so does covid. I know people that died from covid - nothing else. I also know of someone who died  from heart problems and covid was put on the records. But there’s no question it contributed. It’s the same for flu they may not die specifically from flu but it certainly contributes. 
 

Disagree. Facts are social distancing did reduce cases. If you and those around you take the necessary precautions then you won’t catch it. I’m happy wearing my mask thanks whether you think it’s voodoo or some other rubbish. I’ll continue to meet with people I associate with and know take similar precautions. We had a large family / friend gathering recently (around 20) all took correct precautions, nobody had covid and nobody has had it as a result. For me and my wife working from home I don’t think there is high a chance of us catching it as we are not mixing with others. 

Ah that explains it...the 'comfortable working from home middle class lot who are happy to sit on their ass for full pay'. These are the sorts of people that are fully supportive of restrictions because it doesn't affect them one iota.  

I'm sorry but a virus doesn't play by your cautious nature.  Why do you think vulnerable people have caught it and died?  An airborne virus will find a way unless you hermetically seal yourself from the rest of the world. 

Where are the facts that social distancing reduced cases?  Cases were already on their way down before all previous lockdowns. 

You also have absolutely no proof that loads more people would have died without lockdown. None.  The only real world proof we have of similar nations to ourselves such as Sweden, who took a light touch approach, only closed colleges and didn't close down their economy.  They are now pretty much back to normal having suffered less deaths than the UK and lower than the European average. 

Stop listening to these people with mad predictions that keep on being wrong and start living your life freely again. 

Ps. Good to see when I went shopping this morning that mask wearing is now about 50/50. It will continue to decrease as people wake up to the fact that a piece of old rag ain't going to help. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, geosname said:

Cause of death heart attack.

Contributing factor the RTA.

The make and colour of the vehicle is irrelevant, the fact you had a covid test within 28 days is also irrelevant. 

On average there are 400 cancer deaths per day in the UK.  If just 10% of those people had a covid test within 28 days it would account for approximately 14,600 covid death statistics.

604,000 deaths were recorded in 2019 in the UK. If 20% had received a covid test within 28 days 128,000 statistics would have been recorded to the covid death numbers.

Excellent analysis and pretty much what has undoubtedly happened.  If you test for something in ridiculous numbers it is going to be found in a lot of people's systems irrelevant of what they died of. Particularly using a test that the inventor suggested exactly this problem.  He basically said it can find anything you want it to find using the right parameters. 

Excess deaths are the only real reflection of an unusual event and 2020 is not even in the top 5 this century.  2021 is running about 5% below.  

I'm certain that when they analyse causes of death at some point in the future that they'll find much less deaths where Covid was the sole or most important contribution to death. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, valeparklife said:

Of course there would be. Please read my post again. The Government literally explains what constitutes a 'death' on their website.

To add to this, Yoon K Loke and Carl Heneghan, of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford University, wrote “It seems that PHE regularly looks for people on the NHS database who have ever tested positive, and simply checks to see if they are still alive or not. PHE does not appear to consider how long ago the Covid test result was, nor whether the person has been successfully treated in hospital and discharged to the community.”

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/why-no-one-can-ever-recover-from-covid-19-in-england-a-statistical-anomaly/

The World Heath Organisations literally defines a 'COVID death' as "a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness, in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case".

"Probable"!

So you can die without even having a positive COVID test and your death could still be recorded as a "COVID death".

The WHO also explain how they record COVID on a death certificate: 

"COVID-19 should be recorded on the medical certificate of cause of death for ALL decedents where the disease caused, or is assumed to have caused, or contributed to death".

"Assumed"!

So no actual proof is required to have COVID on a death certificate.

https://www.who.int/classifications/icd/Guidelines_Cause_of_Death_COVID-19.pdf?ua=1

Again, what sort of percentage do you think this counts for? If the majority of people with covid werent dying from covid then explain the excess deaths for the pandemic period. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, geosname said:

1/5th of the reported 604,000 deaths.

10% would be 60,400...... 1% would be 6,040...... 20% would actually be120,800 not 128,000.

Why would it be 1/5? Sorry if I missed something somewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


16 minutes ago, WV said:

Again, what sort of percentage do you think this counts for? If the majority of people with covid werent dying from covid then explain the excess deaths for the pandemic period. 

Not hugely significant excess deaths.  Many years in the early 2000s had more per 100,000 of population. Also, excess deaths are measured against the last 5 years which have been historically low. The hysteria created has been more around poor analysis of data. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, WV said:

Why would it be 1/5? Sorry if I missed something somewhere?

He's saying for example if just 1/5 of those deaths from cancer or heart disease also tested positive within 28 days of their death, they would go into Covid figures, which roughly equates to the current Covid death tally. I believe that proper analysis in years to come will uncover the huge errors we have made in using an unreliable test and throwing erroneous deaths into the mix that would have occurred irrelevant of Covid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WV said:

Why would it be 1/5? Sorry if I missed something somewhere?

The 20% (1/5th) is a what if number, as are the rest in the example.

604,000 deaths in 2019 with no covid or covid tests, from various causes.

Given the very extensive testing in 2020 and the first half of 2021 it's fairly safe to assume that a percentage of the deaths in 2019 would have happened within 28 days of a test if applicable. If you take the 604,000 as the base number for 2020 a percentage would have died within the 28 days, whichever percentage number you choose.

The relevant number is the excess deaths over and above the average, it's still a little vague but more accurate than the 28 day cut off. A more accurate number would be the number of people who died as a direct result of covid or with covid as a contributing factor. Not simply because they had a positive test within a time frame.

The 28 day rule is like saying if the people dying (most being elderly) had a receding hairline or hair loss it's a contributing factor.

In not poking a finger at the people who have sadly died, but I am having a jab at the way the stats are presented. If I was a cynic I would suggest they are presented that way to deliberately create fear.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, geosname said:

The 20% (1/5th) is a what if number, as are the rest in the example.

604,000 deaths in 2019 with no covid or covid tests, from various causes.

Given the very extensive testing in 2020 and the first half of 2021 it's fairly safe to assume that a percentage of the deaths in 2019 would have happened within 28 days of a test if applicable. If you take the 604,000 as the base number for 2020 a percentage would have died within the 28 days, whichever percentage number you choose.

The relevant number is the excess deaths over and above the average, it's still a little vague but more accurate than the 28 day cut off. A more accurate number would be the number of people who died as a direct result of covid or with covid as a contributing factor. Not simply because they had a positive test within a time frame.

The 28 day rule is like saying if the people dying (most being elderly) had a receding hairline or hair loss it's a contributing factor.

In not poking a finger at the people who have sadly died, but I am having a jab at the way the stats are presented. If I was a cynic I would suggest they are presented that way to deliberately create fear.

Agreed.  I am a cynic so I'll say it.  That's exactly why they have been presented like that.  Governments around the world panicked through dodgy modelling and unreliable testing have spent huge amounts of money, ruined countless lives and caused a medical backlog that will cost many more. 

They therefore can't suddenly turn around and say they made a mistake as that would admit that this entire episode was a complete policy disaster.  They'd be up for war crimes! 

They need to keep things like test and trace going to justify the heinous costs. They have to keep the fear ramped up.  People are still swallowing it even now after they realised that this wasn't the plague they were promised. 

I feel so sad for these people.  My next door neighbour went to a supermarket for the first time in 2 years  the other day and was terrified.  The propoganda has been shameful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, geosname said:

The 20% (1/5th) is a what if number, as are the rest in the example.

604,000 deaths in 2019 with no covid or covid tests, from various causes.

Given the very extensive testing in 2020 and the first half of 2021 it's fairly safe to assume that a percentage of the deaths in 2019 would have happened within 28 days of a test if applicable. If you take the 604,000 as the base number for 2020 a percentage would have died within the 28 days, whichever percentage number you choose.

The relevant number is the excess deaths over and above the average, it's still a little vague but more accurate than the 28 day cut off. A more accurate number would be the number of people who died as a direct result of covid or with covid as a contributing factor. Not simply because they had a positive test within a time frame.

The 28 day rule is like saying if the people dying (most being elderly) had a receding hairline or hair loss it's a contributing factor.

In not poking a finger at the people who have sadly died, but I am having a jab at the way the stats are presented. If I was a cynic I would suggest they are presented that way to deliberately create fear.

So we are in the land of what ifs and made up numbers 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


41 minutes ago, leedsvaliant said:

Agreed.  I am a cynic so I'll say it.  That's exactly why they have been presented like that.  Governments around the world panicked through dodgy modelling and unreliable testing have spent huge amounts of money, ruined countless lives and caused a medical backlog that will cost many more. 

They therefore can't suddenly turn around and say they made a mistake as that would admit that this entire episode was a complete policy disaster.  They'd be up for war crimes! 

They need to keep things like test and trace going to justify the heinous costs. They have to keep the fear ramped up.  People are still swallowing it even now after they realised that this wasn't the plague they were promised. 

I feel so sad for these people.  My next door neighbour went to a supermarket for the first time in 2 years  the other day and was terrified.  The propoganda has been shameful. 

Give it a rest, peddling your fake theories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Virus tests conducted

Daily

845,680

Total

244,394,007

604,000 deaths is not a what if number. It's the actual number of reported deaths for 2019, none of which are covid.

The test numbers above are not what if.

The what if is....... what if, given the extensive testing, those 604,000 who would have died from varying causes in 2020 (using 2019 as the benchmark)  had not been tested at all. What are the chances?

What are the odds? 

244,000,000 tests, that's about 4 tests for every person in the country, and not one of the 604,000 people who were expected to die were tested within 28 days.

1,655 people died every day in 2019. If the same number of people died from various causes in 2020 a percentage were likely to be tested.

Someone may die today who happens to have a broken fingernail, is that a contributing factor?

130,000 people have died within the 28 day period over 18 months?.

1,655 people died every day in 2019, extend that number over 18 months it's over 900,000.

Ignore the 28 days and the number of deaths jumps to 153,000+. Where covid is mentioned on the death certificate even if no tests were done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, geosname said:

Virus tests conducted

Daily

845,680

Total

244,394,007

604,000 deaths is not a what if number. It's the actual number of reported deaths for 2019, none of which are covid.

The test numbers above are not what if.

The what if is....... what if, given the extensive testing, those 604,000 who would have died from varying causes in 2020 (using 2019 as the benchmark)  had not been tested at all. What are the chances?

What are the odds? 

244,000,000 tests, that's about 4 tests for every person in the country, and not one of the 604,000 people who were expected to die were tested within 28 days.

1,655 people died every day in 2019. If the same number of people died from various causes in 2020 a percentage were likely to be tested.

Someone may die today who happens to have a broken fingernail, is that a contributing factor?

130,000 people have died within the 28 day period over 18 months?.

1,655 people died every day in 2019, extend that number over 18 months it's over 900,000.

Ignore the 28 days and the number of deaths jumps to 153,000+. Where covid is mentioned on the death certificate even if no tests were done.

Yeah ok all made up what ifs again. What is the excess death figure for the 2 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    • Admin don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking. Please report posts and we'll act ASAP. If you're logged in use the orange report post button. If you're not logged in, please - Contact us here
    • If you can't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Follow the link, type in their username and save - Click here
    • Check with admin if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first - Contact us here
  • Friends of OVF




×
×
  • Create New...