Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[Jebus_lives]

Your wrong mate. Ive already explained and posted a copy of the certification and clinical reasoning for the variety of outcomes, of which they aren’t always Covid or not as binary outcome like you suggest.

This article is from the BMJ, which supports the points I was making in regard to certification. I’d suggest it may be more indicative of the clinical reality, than articles from the Daily Mail and Telegraph, even press briefings from politicians. It also has many links in the footnotes

David Oliver: Mistruths and misunderstandings about covid-19 death numbers

I want to set the record straight about some serious misinformation surrounding covid-19 death certification and mortality statistics. I will paraphrase some of the claims that I have heard repeatedly in the media: “People are not dying from, but with, covid-19.” “Deaths classified as from...

www.bmj.com

If anything I think the U.K. have underported the extent of RIP’s. The 28 day cut off point from testing positive, always troubled me and I don’t think it’s clinically reflective of virus progression. Simply put if you die 29 days after a positive test you are not counted.

I think the same based upon my knowledge of reporting..

 

[luuk_deventer]

Very, particularly amongst the unvaccinated, read the article, particularly amongst unvaccinated who can spend long weeks in critical care and ICU, we know they have a higher mortality rate than vaccinated pro rata to.

I have. It is one persons opinion. Other doctors and scientists have theirs.

David refutes some claims without evidencing them. He cites a study which neither confirms or denies those claims.

Why do you think the figure is under reported? David suggests 20% but does not say why.

Governments have been keen to paint worse case scenarios throughout the pandemic, if there were an opportunity to report higher figures, I believe they would have done so.

 

[Neiler]

I have. It is one persons opinion. Other doctors and scientists have theirs.

David refutes some claims without evidencing them. He cites a study which neither confirms or denies those claims.

There are 14 references and citations to clinical research mate as part of his evidence for his article. It’s the British Medical Journal mate, one of the most respected medical journals in the world, it’s not twitter or the tabloids.

 

[Neiler]

I have. It is one persons opinion. Other doctors and scientists have theirs.

David refutes some claims without evidencing them. He cites a study which neither confirms or denies those claims.

Why do you think the figure is under reported? David suggests 20% but does not say why.

Governments have been keen to paint worse case scenarios throughout the pandemic, if there were an opportunity to report higher figures, I believe they would have done so.

I think a better question, is why do you think the figures are over reported? what gain or motivation does the U.K. receive by over reporting deaths as you suggest by a contrived inflated system…

I mean its not good for citizens, health care professionals, surely it’s politically dire collateral wise that so many citizens are dying - what’s the motivation for the suggested contrived over reporting - who wins, for what motivation, for what end?

 

[luuk_deventer]

There are 14 references and citations to clinical research mate as part of his evidence for his article.

That is not true. Several of the 14 references are to his own and other opinion blogs on BMJ and other sites.

There are a few studies linked, including the Leicester study he cites in this article, and then references to the Guardian and BBC reporting on it.

That is okay, I like reading lots of different sources from different points of view and then making my own mind up. He is a little bit sketchy in how he refutes these claims, that is all.

 

[Jebus_lives]

I have. It is one persons opinion. Other doctors and scientists have theirs.

David refutes some claims without evidencing them. He cites a study which neither confirms or denies those claims.

Why do you think the figure is under reported? David suggests 20% but does not say why.

Governments have been keen to paint worse case scenarios throughout the pandemic, if there were an opportunity to report higher figures, I believe they would have done so.

I'm not sure that's entirely true.

And I'm not sure why any Government would be keen to report higher death figures

 

[luuk_deventer]

I think a better question, is why do you think the figures are over reported? what gain or motivation does the U.K. receive by over reporting deaths as you suggest by a contrived inflated system…

I mean its not good for citizens, health care professionals, surely it’s politically dire collateral wise that so many citizens are dying - what’s the motivation for the suggested contrived over reporting - who wins, for what motivation, for what end?

I do not know. I wish I did. It is not just the UK. Internationally it has been similar. The behaviour of so many governments over the pandemic has not been normal. They have behaved bizarrely. Not in the interests of their own people (so maybe that is normally lol) and often against the Scientists.

Who wins is obvious. I think special powers were granted to governments in a crisis situation and there is now a political motivation to keep those powers. Lots of powerful people have been very happy with the events of the last two years too.

 

[luuk_deventer]

I'm not sure that's entirely true.

And I'm not sure why any Government would be keen to report higher death figures

In the UK for example, SAGE always overshoot figures by a long long way. I think it was the chair himself who admitted that they are told what to model to support government policy. They paint worst case scenarios without commenting on their likelihood, which is then presented to the public. That should not sit well with anyone I think.

 

[Neiler]

That is not true. Several of the 14 references are to his own and other opinion blogs on BMJ and other sites.

There are a few studies linked, including the Leicester study he cites in this article, and then references to the Guardian and BBC reporting on it.

That is okay, I like reading lots of different sources from different points of view and then making my own mind up. He is a little bit sketchy in how he refutes these claims, that is all.

With all respect and I don’t mean this to be insulting in the last page you and others were providing references and evidence from studies the Daily mail and The Telegraph and telling people to “follow the science”, now you are discrimg the BMJ, medical professional who provided citations for their clinical reasoning, I think I’m fairly sure footed in what I suggest based on the sources I provided given the afore mentioned context.

 

[Neiler]

I do not know. I wish I did. It is not just the UK. Internationally it has been similar. The behaviour of so many governments over the pandemic has not been normal. They have behaved bizarrely. Not in the interests of their own people (so maybe that is normally lol) and often against the Scientists.

Who wins is obvious. I think special powers were granted to governments in a crisis situation and there is now a political motivation to keep those powers. Lots of powerful people have been very happy with the events of the last two years too.

So powerful people, want to stay in power, via controlling people and Covid in the Trojan horse.

Not for me mate, Goverments are borrowing and spending billions, on. Ovid measures in terms of vaccines, testing, Covid financial supports, health care etc. Many economies are in dire need.

I actually think the U.K.s very open approach to do with Covid comparatively to the rest of the world is down to economic reasons as opposed to public health. Its been far more open for longer than anywhere else restriction wise. So if it is about control they aren’t using it very well.

As I mentioned I actually think the RIP count in the U.K. is actually a lot higher then reported, I believe the official Goverment stats vs the ONS excess death stats don't stack up - many reasons for that in my opinion, but a big one is the 28 day cut off. The U.K. also had massive problems with testing in its first year of Covid, so who knows how many died without getting properly tested.

 

[LinekersLegs]

I have. It is one persons opinion. Other doctors and scientists have theirs.

David refutes some claims without evidencing them. He cites a study which neither confirms or denies those claims.

Why do you think the figure is under reported? David suggests 20% but does not say why.

Governments have been keen to paint worse case scenarios throughout the pandemic, if there were an opportunity to report higher figures, I believe they would have done so.

That is untrue for the US under Trump admin who repeatedly tried to downplay and minimize everything from cases to severe risks.

NPR Cookie Consent and Choices

Most notably, Trump acknowledged to veteran journalist Bob Woodward that he knowingly downplayed the coronavirus, even though he knew it was more deadly than the seasonal flu.

"I wanted to always play it down," the president said in a March interview, the audio recording of which was made public in September. "I still like playing it down, because I don't want to create a panic."

And it would be bizarre politics for Biden to scupper the mid term elections by inflating numbers. Entire regions of the US had overflowing hospitals and were not admitting new emergency patients - they weren’t caused by politicians wanting worse case scenarios but because lots of people were very ill from Covid at the same time.

Americans are dying because no hospital will take them

The country’s pandemic failures have sometimes led to deadly health care rationing.

www.vox.com

Hospitals Are in Serious Trouble

Omicron is inundating a health-care system that was already buckling under the cumulative toll of every previous surge.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Deleted member 48881]

 

[Amw79]

Crazy that after 2 years people can have this view that they don’t believe the scientific consensus, don’t believe the doctors, don’t believe medical institutions, think that doctors all around the world are deliberately falsifying death certificates and knowingly jeopardising public health with dangerous vaccines, think that governments are willingly tanking their own economies, but can’t point to a reasonable motivation for all this, other than ‘control’ or ‘extra powers’, which most governments are relinquishing now anyway.

 

[Jebus_lives]

In the UK for example, SAGE always overshoot figures by a long long way. I think it was the chair himself who admitted that they are told what to model to support government policy. They paint worst case scenarios without commenting on their likelihood, which is then presented to the public. That should not sit well with anyone I think.

Modelling is not reporting.

Remarkable that this needs to be explained two years into this..

 

[CharliePotato]

Ryan Air true to take a moral high ground ?