Covid-19 Discussion

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Nothing to see here ......

1600946121108.png :rolleyes:
 
Which is why I said that CFR is actually much more relevant to the public, because it simply shows a statical correlation that does not involve any theory or assumptions. It is very accurate in respect of assessing the probability.
So in order to assess the threat posed by Covid-19 in a meaningful way we need case and we need fatality numbers and the further apart those two lines on a CFR graph are the less chance the "infected" have of dying.

Since we are told cases have gone up significantly in the last 2 weeks or so and deaths have not risen significantly those two lines of the CFR graph are moving even further apart during September. Even less chance of dying if infected.

The complete opposite to what we are being told rising cases/ infections means at this point in time.

Your point of the active young (assuming they are live infectious) eventually at some point infecting the old brings into focus so what are the Government/ NHS doing to protect the known at risk groups?

70+ years old with 2 or more comorbidities. Who represent 95% of all deaths.

Protect them, and i do not mean by shutting down society as a whole.

I would suggest this winter the government should pay all heating gas & electricity bills for anyone on a pension in the UK.

Keeping the elderly warm WILL prevent deaths.
 
So in order to assess the threat posed by Covid-19 in a meaningful way we need case and we need fatality numbers and the further apart those two lines on a CFR graph are the less chance the "infected" have of dying.

Since we are told cases have gone up significantly in the last 2 weeks or so and deaths have not risen significantly those two lines of the CFR graph are moving even further apart during September. Even less chance of dying if infected.

The complete opposite to what we are being told rising cases/ infections means at this point in time.

Your point of the active young (assuming they are live infectious) eventually at some point infecting the old brings into focus so what are the Government/ NHS doing to protect the known at risk groups?

70+ years old with 2 or more comorbidities. Who represent 95% of all deaths.

Protect them, and i do not mean by shutting down society as a whole.

I would suggest this winter the government should pay all heating gas & electricity bills for anyone on a pension in the UK.

Keeping the elderly warm WILL prevent deaths.


1. The 'chances of dying if infected' - IFR- isn't really a useful figure for the public, because there are several assumptions made in the process of estimating the total number of people infected at any given point of time, and so - like the various models - the IFR figure is part-speculative.

And, more importantly, it says nothing to you as an individual. If you did not have a postive test, you don't know if you are infected, so you will have no idea what your risk factor is (or, in other words, you'll need to multiply the IFR by your chances of being infected based on your region and age group etc.... which makes things even more complicated). And, once you had a positive test, you still don't know if you are actually infected - due to the possibility of false positive - and therfore actually fall in the IFR risk group (or you'll need to factor-in the test accuracy..... etc). So the IFR is really meaningless outside the realm of medical research.

A narrowing or widening gap between IFR and CFR will more likely reflect changes in external factors rather than in the actual behaviour of the virus.


2. The delta between IFR and CFR is mainly a reflection of our testing methodology, and it is not related to the behaviour of the virus. As an example, if we only test people with active symptoms, then our knowledge of the infection rate in the population will be very low, and we'll need to give greater weight to the assumptions we make regarding the level of asymptomatic infection in the population at large. If, on the other hand, we regularly test random samples of the populatuon then the larger the sample the more accurate our estimate of the actual infection rate. And, the accuracy of the test used will have a direct impact on the accuracy of IFR. The CFR is dependent on the behaviour of the virus, the treatments, the way we classify infection-related death, and the accuracy of the test.


3. The government is already giving elderly people a Winter Fuel Payment.
 
Last edited:
1. The 'chances of dying if infected' - IFR- isn't really a useful figure for the public, because there are several assumptions made in the process of estimating the total number of people infected at any given point of time, and so - like the various models - the IFR figure is part-speculative.

And, more importantly, it says nothing to you as an individual. If you did not have a postive test, you don't know if you are infected, so you will have no idea what your risk factor is (or, in other words, you'll need to multiply the IFR by your chances of being infected based on your region and age group etc.... which makes things even more complicated). And, once you had a positive test, you still don't know if you are actually infected - due to the possibility of false positive - and therfore actually fall in the IFR risk group (or you'll need to factor-in the test accuracy..... etc). So the IFR is really meaningless outside the realm of medical research.

A narrowing or widening gap between IFR and CFR will more likely reflect changes in external factors rather than in the actual behaviour of the virus.


2. The delta between IFR and CFR is mainly a reflection of our testing methodology, and it is not related to the behaviour of the virus. As an example, if we only test people with active symptoms, then our knowledge of the infection rate in the population will be very low, and we'll need to give greater weight to the assumptions we make regarding the level of asymptomatic infection in the population at large. If, on the other hand, we regularly test random samples of the populatuon then the larger the sample the more accurate our estimate of the actual infection rate. And, the accuracy of the test used will have a direct impact on the accuracy of IFR. The CFR is dependent on the behaviour of the virus, the treatments, the way we classify infection-related death, and the accuracy of tbe test.


3. The government is already giving elderly people a Winter Fuel Payment.
So rising infection rates not being matched by death rates now in September mean less chance of dying if infected.

The complete opposite of the media & Governments "rising cases" apocalypse narrative.


I am suggesting instead of just a single £300 winter fuel payment, paid in arrears, the UK Government remove any chance of fuel poverty on the UK's elderly and cover all heating costs.

This will allow the elderly to stay warm at all times which is important for those with poor immune systems to prevent the onset of influenza and the descent into pneumonia and hospitalization.

Considering the amount they are currently spending on everything else in society and that this will provide targetted health benefits to those most at risk of Covid-19 ( 70+ years old & comorbidities represent 95% of all deaths) it makes perfect sense.
 
Last edited:
Thanks - that's kinda the direction I was going in.

Apparently these tests not only produce a significant number of false positives, they also count any trace of covid presence, including vestiges of dead cells where the virus was present but is no longer.

In other words, it is a means to an end ... and I'm worried about what the end game is.
What do you think the end game could be Swotty?
 
Confirmed on live tv by the government, 93% of the covid tests are wrong, only 7% are accurate enough to be relied on. Also, the former chief science officer of Pfizer says the "2nd wave" is based on false-positive data.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
What do you think the end game could be Swotty?
DNA harvesting and Mass Genocide ?

The population is being locked down for a reason. The figures do not stack up, as evidenced by other academics and statisticians.

So what is Boris' strategy? I suspect he will cave in on Brexit, although I fervently hope he does not. However those opposed to us leaving are ramping up the pressure on him. There is also the outcome of the US elections to factor in.

Brexit and Trump present significant obstacles to the New World Order project. Both are in danger of being overcome and then ID2020 and Agenda 2030 can progress. Look up Rockefeller and "Lock Step".

I guess a career working for politicians has left me suspicious of those in power's real motives.

What's your take?
 
Imho Boris has been bought by the 1% he wants the NWO, and has rid of QE11

Copied this may explain better.

In passing section 38 of the EU Withdrawal [Agreement] Act 2020 into lawlessness, Parliament implicitly deposed QEII by acknowledging itself as being ‘sovereign’.

The Common Law classifies this as a treason felony, since it effectively removes the royal prerogatives that enable the monarch to refuse assent to unlawful acts and to dissolve a tyrannous Parliament as the acknowledged sovereign.

However, Parliament has always consisted of the commons, the lords and the sovereign monarch, in a tripartite constitutional system of lawmaking, constituted to uphold the Common Law. This Parliament has dishonestly cast those long-established conventions aside without the consent of the People.

The effect of this at law is to render void every act of this Parliament, for leaving the People subject to a totalitarian government, which it has subsequently made unaccountable at the ballot box, by way of the unenforceable Coronavirus Act 2020.

This suspension of democratic accountability alone renders the government de facto in nature. Every action it has taken since 31/01/2020 has been ultra vires [without jurisdiction] under the Common Law.

In so doing, Parliament has fatally breached articles 1 and 2 of the Bill of Rights 1688, which means that it automatically forfeited its supreme legislative authority to make and enforce statutes given the force of law.

Therefore, in the absence of a legitimate monarch, commons and lords, the Common Law dictates that sovereignty reverts back to the People from the deposed monarch.

End Quote

Interesting enough, Not that many on here take me seriously, I have had another email back from a Ex MEP confirming our "March towards Total State control" is worrying.

As Far as Trump is concerned i do believe he has our democratic ways at heart.
If he loses this election the NWO will imho come very swiftly.

As i've said at many points early on in this thread things are playing out as id thought they would Conspiracy or not.

Time will tell, Im going for "Total State control" by 2025 just like in China.
 
The population is being locked down for a reason. The figures do not stack up, as evidenced by other academics and statisticians.

So what is Boris' strategy? I suspect he will cave in on Brexit, although I fervently hope he does not. However those opposed to us leaving are ramping up the pressure on him. There is also the outcome of the US elections to factor in.

Brexit and Trump present significant obstacles to the New World Order project. Both are in danger of being overcome and then ID2020 and Agenda 2030 can progress. Look up Rockefeller and "Lock Step".

I guess a career working for politicians has left me suspicious of those in power's real motives.

What's your take?
I agree Brexit will not happen and to be fair it is small fry considering what else is now going on. By that i mean democracy has already been stopped by the Coronavirus Act 2020. Which has just been set in stone again for the next 6 months. Defying the will of people on Brexit will be easier because of this.

The chancellor proclaiming today that there are jobs that are unviable means he is working solely towards the establishment of a very different society. A new normal or a Great Reset.

If democracy ever comes around again i wonder what the masses will say is unviable?

Another theory i have read about is that all the obviously ridiculous contrived measures are being allowed to take place to make the public rebel. Problem reaction solution. National Governments fall because of this to be replaced by a one world government.
 
Last edited:
Confirmed on live tv by the government, 93% of the covid tests are wrong, only 7% are accurate enough to be relied on. Also, the former chief science officer of Pfizer says the "2nd wave" is based on false-positive data.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Why is this not headline news?

The 6178 PCR test cases / infections used to justify government policy are in fact only 433 cases based on this false positive rate.

(Recognising the proviso that Tier1 & Tier 2 numbers unavailable to give an accurate figure.)

 
Last edited:
Why is this not headline news?

The 6178 PCR test cases / infections used to justify government policy are in fact only 433 cases based on this false positive rate.


Shall i email Boris and ask?? lol:wallbash:
 
Another theory i have read about is that all the obviously ridiculous contrived measures are being allowed to take place to make the public rebel. Problem reaction solution. National Governments fall because of this to be replaced by a one world government.

^^This as there is currently no Single Party the People could vote for with Democracy at its core. Perhaps it's time for one.
 
Coming out of lockdown in May, June and July we had masses demonstrating and packing beaches yet no significant case increases. Pubs opened up with crowds gathering in and out of them, more people back at work and out shopping again with no significant case increases.
Yet in the last 20 days or so there has been a large increase in recorded infections, the only real change in this period is the reopening of schools.
The conclusions I can come to are either children are non-symptomatic spreaders either by nature or design ( the virus is man made after all) or the testing figures are wrong
Just my thoughts
 
EigY-GbXsAEUM4L.jpg

The provisional number of deaths registered in England and Wales w/e 11 Sept (week 37) was 9,811
2072 more deaths than week 36
505 more than the 5 year average for week 37
99 deaths mention Covid-19, 1% of the total
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom