Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Wed Sep 23, 2020 7:12 pm  

REDWHITEANDBLUE wrote:

I expect the death rate to be 2 or 3%.

Wow that mortality rate means between 1,360,000 - 2,040,000 would die without any interventions. Didn't the boffins at Imperial College come up with the worst case scenario of 500,000 deaths and loads of professors at Oxford Uni thought they were way off. Pretty sure with the case of Sweden (est.. 85,000 deaths after three months of no strict lockdown) has rubbished Professor "Pantsdown" Ferguson's modelling.

[PopTart]

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Wed Sep 23, 2020 7:20 pm  

BarnsleyGull wrote:

Not true.

I can tell you it was true first hand.

[PopTart]

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Wed Sep 23, 2020 7:23 pm  

RickK wrote:

What evidence do you have to back your claim for the figures being understated

I didn't say they were understated, but I can give you the example of Pinderfields as I knew someone in there that was one of the first to come back out and my close relative works on the ward.

It's not to say they all died, though the majority did, but some were just a long time on ventilators.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Wed Sep 23, 2020 8:26 pm  

Here's some facts which NEVER get discussed on the BBC or Sly News

Total deaths of all causes with a "Pre existing condition" that tested positive of COVID19 in England

Age group / Yes / No / Unkown presence of pre-existing condition / Total deaths
Total: 28,309 / 1,396 / 0 / 29,705

0 - 19 yrs: 16 / 4 / 0 / 20
20 - 39 yrs: 181 / 35 / 0 / 216
40 - 59 yrs: 2,037 / 269 / 0 / 2,306
60 - 79 yrs: 10,720 / 575 / 0 / 11,295
80+ yrs: 15,355 / 513 / 0 / 15,868

So was it "of" COVID or "with" COVID? Was it the heart disease, cancer, kidney/lung disease, diabetes, dementia or COVID which was the main contributor?
Median age of death is 81 years of age by the way. These are not anecdotal stories but factual data provided by NHS England. Not to say any of these deaths aren't tragic because they are regardless of the cause or COVID.

[PopTart]

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Wed Sep 23, 2020 8:28 pm  

MatthewTrin wrote:

Here's some facts which NEVER get discussed on the BBC or Sly News

Total deaths of all causes with a "Pre existing condition" that tested positive of COVID19 in England

Age group / Yes / No / Unkown presence of pre-existing condition / Total deaths
Total 28,309 / 1,396 / 0 / 29,705

0 - 19 yrs 16 / 4 / 0 / 20
20 - 39 181 / 35 / 0 / 216
40 - 59 2,037 / 269 / 0 / 2,306
60 - 79 10,720 / 575 / 0 / 11,295
80+ 15,355 / 513 / 0 / 15,868

So was it "of" COVID or "with" COVID? Was it the heart disease, caner, kidne/lung disease, diabetes, dementia or COVID which was the main contributor?
Median age of death is 81 years of age by the way. These are not anecdotal stories but factual data provided by NHS England. Not to say any of these deaths aren't tragic because they are regardless of the cause or COVID.

So what point are you making.
People are dying of Covid and of other things. We have a chance of slowing the covid ones down. If we had a new thing that will slow the heart attacks down we'd probably do that too.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Wed Sep 23, 2020 8:33 pm  

PopTart wrote:

So what point are you making.
People are dying of Covid and of other things. We have a chance of slowing the covid ones down. If we had a new thing that will slow the heart attacks down we'd probably do that too.

They label them ALL as COVID that's my point.

We should be putting all money and efforts into protecting hospitals and care homes. Six months in now so its about time we made them COVID safe whilst supporting those with serious pre-existing illnesses in the general community. Time and money better spent on these areas than on mass furlough and a state run propaganda campaign endorsing the NHS. Common sense with proper expertise from these so called leaders and experts would be nice.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:43 pm  

MatthewTrin wrote:

They label them ALL as COVID that's my point.

We should be putting all money and efforts into protecting hospitals and care homes. Six months in now so its about time we made them COVID safe whilst supporting those with serious pre-existing illnesses in the general community. Time and money better spent on these areas than on mass furlough and a state run propaganda campaign endorsing the NHS. Common sense with proper expertise from these so called leaders and experts would be nice.

I’ve never understood (as a lay person why would I I guess) or, more relevantly, heard an explanation from the many experts in the relevant fields that are in the media, as to why we aren’t just concentrating all the efforts on the clinically at risk groups. For all the unknowns about Covid the one area that there seems general consensus on, seemingly backed up by those figures, is that age and certain underlying health conditions are the main risk factors. Why aren’t we enabling those groups to shield effectively with support whilst letting the vast majority of life carry on as normal? poop for them maybe I accept but better than the alternative

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Wed Sep 23, 2020 11:47 pm  

PopTart wrote:

With the amount of research you've done, I reckon you know those people didn't die solely of the flu.

Yes, rather like "covid deaths."

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Wed Sep 23, 2020 11:51 pm  

REDWHITEANDBLUE wrote: Wow your maths is incredible for such a person that thinks they are on the morale high ground with Prof Whitty! UK population according to you and your research is almost 68000000 with a UK death figure of 41,825 to date is about 0.07% as you say but this is where you lose the plot according to your esteemed mate Prof Whitty about 8% of the population have hd the virus thats 5,440,000 now take the death from that it becomes about .8% however the actual positive tests in the UK are much lower than this and at approximately 410,000 the current death rate is at 10%. I do not believe for one minute the death rate will be anything near 10% overall but your little crusade is totally flawed. I expect the death rate to be 2 or 3%. IT''S THE FLU you almost got that right its a strain of the same family. Just to help with your expertise here is a report from March 2020 it will assist you in your knowledge to understand the mortality rates at the time and the difference. https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing ... flu-update Public Health England published on the 11th March 2020 that it estimates that on average 17,000 people have died from the flu in England annually between 2014/15 and 2018/19. Obviously this is England and does not include the rest of the UK so it will be higher than this I have read your report from Nick Stripe in the Daily Fail dated in 2018 here is another one by him in June this year which do you put your faith in after all he does have a degree in Geography a Diploma in Economics and has worked in Market research. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52890515 I could go on but I have my view on it you clearly have yours. No, those figures come from not my research (the .7%) but from the website you recommended. They just happen to coincide with figures previously stated by me. Chris Whitty is not my mate rather he is your mate as no doubt you are following his orders re masks and the rest. Otherwise I guess you would not be arguing with me. I quoted him, and he should know, to show just what a scam this whole thing is. My guess is that prior to his speech his office lacky gave him the file marked “TRUTH” rather than the file marked “LIES for public consumption only” Actually, in all fairness, I was going to state that the 50,000 figure had been disputed by the British Medical Council ?? or whatever they are called, but I ran out of time this afternoon. They claimed that the actual figure was hugely inflated by the government. But nevertheless, that is the figure put out by the government through the Office of National Statistics just as today they put out the Covid figures. But there we are, who can trust the government either then, in 2018 or now, in 2020. I certainly don't, do you ? I mean, they wouldn't lie to us............would they? In conclusion, statistics are shown to be a load of garbage and I for one will take em all with a pinch of salt be it Nick Stripe or anyone else. But I believed Chris Whitty talking about covid from a medical point of view, even if he didn't really mean to let that juicy info slip out. By the way, do you know YouTube took down that Whitty video, I wonder why?

REDWHITEANDBLUE wrote: Wow your maths is incredible for such a person that thinks they are on the morale high ground with Prof Whitty! UK population according to you and your research is almost 68000000 with a UK death figure of 41,825 to date is about 0.07% as you say but this is where you lose the plot according to your esteemed mate Prof Whitty about 8% of the population have hd the virus thats 5,440,000 now take the death from that it becomes about .8% however the actual positive tests in the UK are much lower than this and at approximately 410,000 the current death rate is at 10%. I do not believe for one minute the death rate will be anything near 10% overall but your little crusade is totally flawed. I expect the death rate to be 2 or 3%. IT''S THE FLU you almost got that right its a strain of the same family. Just to help with your expertise here is a report from March 2020 it will assist you in your knowledge to understand the mortality rates at the time and the difference. https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing ... flu-update Public Health England published on the 11th March 2020 that it estimates that on average 17,000 people have died from the flu in England annually between 2014/15 and 2018/19. Obviously this is England and does not include the rest of the UK so it will be higher than this I have read your report from Nick Stripe in the Daily Fail dated in 2018 here is another one by him in June this year which do you put your faith in after all he does have a degree in Geography a Diploma in Economics and has worked in Market research. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52890515 I could go on but I have my view on it you clearly have yours. No, those figures come from not my research (the .7%) but from the website you recommended. They just happen to coincide with figures previously stated by me. Chris Whitty is not my mate rather he is your mate as no doubt you are following his orders re masks and the rest. Otherwise I guess you would not be arguing with me. I quoted him, and he should know, to show just what a scam this whole thing is. My guess is that prior to his speech his office lacky gave him the file marked “TRUTH” rather than the file marked “LIES for public consumption only” Actually, in all fairness, I was going to state that the 50,000 figure had been disputed by the British Medical Council ?? or whatever they are called, but I ran out of time this afternoon. They claimed that the actual figure was hugely inflated by the government. But nevertheless, that is the figure put out by the government through the Office of National Statistics just as today they put out the Covid figures. But there we are, who can trust the government either then, in 2018 or now, in 2020. I certainly don't, do you ? I mean, they wouldn't lie to us............would they? In conclusion, statistics are shown to be a load of garbage and I for one will take em all with a pinch of salt be it Nick Stripe or anyone else. But I believed Chris Whitty talking about covid from a medical point of view, even if he didn't really mean to let that juicy info slip out. By the way, do you know YouTube took down that Whitty video, I wonder why?

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Wed Sep 23, 2020 11:59 pm  

Schunter wrote:

I’ve never understood (as a lay person why would I I guess) or, more relevantly, heard an explanation from the many experts in the relevant fields that are in the media, as to why we aren’t just concentrating all the efforts on the clinically at risk groups. For all the unknowns about Covid the one area that there seems general consensus on, seemingly backed up by those figures, is that age and certain underlying health conditions are the main risk factors. Why aren’t we enabling those groups to shield effectively with support whilst letting the vast majority of life carry on as normal? poop for them maybe I accept but better than the alternative

Because the agenda, or this tyrany isn't and never was, about covid.