Coronavirus

[Bud the Baker]

Just now, faraway saint said:

Who has said anyone, except you, is falsifying anything?

It's DIFFERENT methods of reporting.

The ONS have their vague criteria which easily gives a false number of who has DIED from Covid.

 

Take it up wi Gabe after all he's president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine and he says the ONS figure is "the actual number of deaths" - what nefarious reason does he have for endorsing the ONS?

[faraway saint]

Just now, Bud the Baker said:

Take it up wi Gabe after all he's president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine and he says the ONS figure is "the actual number of deaths" - what nefarious reason does he have for endorsing the ONS?

Another who hides behind another fecking "expert" and can't see the obvious flaw in their measuring criteria because it doesn't suit your boring political agenda.

 

 

[hamlet]

2 minutes ago, Hendo said:

Given fans were only allowed in at the weekend, that would not have an effect on current numbers.

Didn't suggest it would. But it will in two weeks.

[faraway saint]

Just now, hamlet said:

Didn't suggest it would. But it will in two weeks.

In the bigger picture it MIGHT have some effect (Impossible to get anything accurate from this I would suggest) but the Christmas rush and numerous family get togethers will, IMO, have a bigger effect. 

[Bud the Baker]

19 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Another who hides behind another fecking "expert" and can't see the obvious flaw in their measuring criteria because it doesn't suit your boring political agenda.

No I can't see the obvious flaw and you've yet to explain why it's an obvious flaw, if it's such an obvious flaw please explain it to me, but I want something better than the "worldometer" (which has recorded 2 Covid deaths in China since mid-April) says differently - FFS even New Zealand has recorded more in that period.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Bud the Baker

[faraway saint]

2 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

No I can't see the obvious flaw and you've yet to explain why it's an obvious flaw, if it's such an obvious flaw please explain it to me, but I want something better than the "worldometer" (which has recorded 2 Covid deaths in China since mid-April) says differently.

Aye ok..................................where Covid has been mentioned...........................what else, a runny nose? 

It's VERY obvious you believe what you want and for the obvious reasons. 

Oh, nice attempt deflection on China..............I try to focus on the UK as I'm not planning to visit China.

Tenerife on the other hand. 

✈️ 🍹

 

[Bud the Baker]

15 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Aye ok..................................where Covid has been mentioned...........................what else, a runny nose? 

It's VERY obvious you believe what you want and for the obvious reasons. 

Oh, nice attempt deflection on China..............I try to focus on the UK as I'm not planning to visit China.

Tenerife on the other hand. 

✈️ 🍹

 

Nope, you've got nothing.

I believe what 51,000 Harold Shipman acolytes, the ONS & president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine say.

China's worldometer tally is just a more extreme example of what happening at Holyrood and Westminster, so it's not deflection at all it's what's known as a relevant comparison.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Bud the Baker

[Slarti]

No I can't see the obvious flaw and you've yet to explain why it's an obvious flaw, if it's such an obvious flaw please explain it to me, but I want something better than the "worldometer" (which has recorded 2 Covid deaths in China since mid-April) says differently - FFS even New Zealand has recorded more in that period.

The obvious flaw can be demonstrated thusly.

If ten people were to die and they all had covid on the death certificate and 5 of them also had influenza on the death certificate, it could be claimed that 10 people died of covid and 5 died of influenza - a total of 15 deaths, but there were only 10.

That is the issue with counting every death where covid is mentioned as caused by covid. Every person dies because their heart stops beating for too long, therefore covid kills nobody and hearts stopping kills everybody. See how silly it can get?

[Bud the Baker]

Just now, Slarti said:

The obvious flaw can be demonstrated thusly.

If ten people were to die and they all had covid on the death certificate and 5 of them also had influenza on the death certificate, it could be claimed that 10 people died of covid and 5 died of influenza - a total of 15 deaths, but there were only 10.

That is the issue with counting every death where covid is mentioned as caused by covid. Every person dies because their heart stops beating for too long, therefore covid kills nobody and hearts stopping kills everybody. See how silly it can get?

Nope that's exactly what @faraway saint is saying - that it's a different method.

You haven't explained why 51.000 GPs. the ONS & president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine are wrong - is it a sinister conspiracy theory to make Boris & Nicola look shady?

[faraway saint]

6 minutes ago, Slarti said:

The obvious flaw can be demonstrated thusly.

If ten people were to die and they all had covid on the death certificate and 5 of them also had influenza on the death certificate, it could be claimed that 10 people died of covid and 5 died of influenza - a total of 15 deaths, but there were only 10.

That is the issue with counting every death where covid is mentioned as caused by covid. Every person dies because their heart stops beating for too long, therefore covid kills nobody and hearts stopping kills everybody. See how silly it can get?

You missed out runny nose, a killer in the winter. 

[Bud the Baker]

Already had one change ahead of schedule today...

Quote

Pressure grows on No 10 to prevent Christmas Covid surge

Downing Street says there are no plans to review guidance on household mixing or schools

Yeah & Downing Street have an impressive record on sticking to their guns since Boris aeeived! 

That was at 18:25pm

At 20:30pm Hancock says

Quote

21 mins ago

 

Hopes of normal family gatherings over Christmas have been thrown into doubt by health secretary Matt Hancock, who said he could not rule out “further action” after plunging millions of people in London and the southeast into the toughest tier 3 restrictions.

2 HOURS & 5 MINUTES! 

Edited December 14, 2020 by Bud the Baker

[ALBIONSAINT]

1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

The GPs fill in the Death Certificates the Office for National Statistics (ONS) tallies the data - as far as I can tell neither the GPs nor the ONS have any reason to falsify the data whereas the politicians certainly have - call it lies or manipulating the data whatever you will I believe like Prof Gabriel Scally, president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine the ONS tally of Death Certificate's really is the best data.

Yes at £75 a pop, there bloody loving this pandemic 😷 

[ALBIONSAINT]

24 minutes ago, Slarti said:

The obvious flaw can be demonstrated thusly.

If ten people were to die and they all had covid on the death certificate and 5 of them also had influenza on the death certificate, it could be claimed that 10 people died of covid and 5 died of influenza - a total of 15 deaths, but there were only 10.

That is the issue with counting every death where covid is mentioned as caused by covid. Every person dies because their heart stops beating for too long, therefore covid kills nobody and hearts stopping kills everybody. See how silly it can get?

Sounds like numberwang to me....😂

 

 

[Slarti]

Nope that's exactly what [mention=2846]faraway saint[/mention] is saying - that it's a different method.
You haven't explained why 51.000 GPs. the ONS & president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine are wrong - is it a sinister conspiracy theory to make Boris & Nicola look shady?

Nope that's exactly what [mention=2846]faraway saint[/mention] is saying - that it's a different method.
You haven't explained why 51.000 GPs. the ONS & president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine are wrong - is it a sinister conspiracy theory to make Boris & Nicola look shady?

I haven't tried to explain anything other than what I explained. I was pointing out why just taking "covid on the death certificate" as the count is flawed.

If you can't see that flaw, that is your issue, not mine.

I never said anyone was "wrong".

Taking my example, if someone dies and both covid and flu are on the death certificate, does that get recorded as a covid death or a non-covid death?

Sounds like numberwang to me....[emoji23]
 
 

You just wanted to say "wang", didn't you? [emoji1787]

[Bud the Baker]

3 minutes ago, Slarti said:

 

 

 

 

I haven't tried to explain anything other than what I explained. I was pointing out why just taking "covid on the death certificate" as the count is flawed.

If you can't see that flaw, that is your issue, not mine.

I never said anyone was "wrong".

Taking my example, if someone dies and both covid and flu are on the death certificate, does that get recorded as a covid death or a non-covid death?




You just wanted to say "wang", didn't you?

 

 

 

 

You've explained nothing just given an absurd hypothesis - you haven't explained why the evidence on the death certificates (which you haven't seen) signed by a medical practitioner, tallied by the ONS and endorsed by the president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine is wrong - albionsaint deconstructed your post succinctly "numberwang".

[ALBIONSAINT]

13 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

You've explained nothing just given an absurd hypothesis - you haven't explained why the evidence on the death certificates (which you haven't seen) signed by a medical practitioner, tallied by the ONS and endorsed by the president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine is wrong - albionsaint deconstructed your post succinctly "numberwang".

I did? 

[Slarti]

You've explained nothing just given an absurd hypothesis - you haven't explained why the evidence on the death certificates (which you haven't seen) signed by a medical practitioner, tallied by the ONS and endorsed by the president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine is wrong - albionsaint deconstructed your post succinctly "numberwang".

I never said anybody was "wrong", I already stated that. What is it with people on here that they can't take what is written as the whole point without having to assume that people are disagreeing with them. I made my point, I don't care if you agree with it or not, or whether you want to read something into my post that isn't there just do you can feel that you're fighting the world, the point is valid. If you disagree that the point is valid then say why and we can discuss that.

 

I did notice that you avoided the question, you know, the one that was directly related to the point i was making.

 

Edit: There was no hypothesis there (absurd or otherwise), just examples.

[Slarti]

I did? 

Here was me thinking you were just being silly, too.

[Bud the Baker]

13 minutes ago, Slarti said:

I never said anybody was "wrong", I already stated that. What is it with people on here that they can't take what is written as the whole point without having to assume that people are disagreeing with them. I made my point, I don't care if you agree with it or not, or whether you want to read something into my post that isn't there just do you can feel that you're fighting the world, the point is valid. If you disagree that the point is valid then say why and we can discuss that.

I did notice that you avoided the question, you know, the one that was directly related to the point i was making.

I did answer your question - I clearly stated your hypothesis is dadaist and that I retain my opinion that the evidence on the death certificates (which you haven't seen) signed by a medical practitioner, tallied by the ONS and endorsed by the president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine is the correct figure....

.....and so the dance begins!

[bazil85]

8 hours ago, oaksoft said:

And I know for a fact that this man is not the only person to have gone through this.

People like Bazil need to explain why the family of this man should just (and I'm quoting Bazil directly) "suck it up" as regards ongoing restrictions. Then he needs to explain why it is better that a handful of 80 year olds with underlying health conditions are saved in preference to people like this man.

Tricky thing this moral high ground grabbing.

Good job on the ignoring front Oakster. But let’s just clarify where you are categorically wrong on my view. 
1. I have never claimed there was a perfect solution to the pandemic, there isn’t. (Despite your arrogance at educating me on this, it’s never been my view) So the premise for your point falls apart. 

2. this is a very sad outcome & yes I’m sure there are others. For me it’s a failing of process & investment more than an issue with restrictions. As far as I am aware, the advice is to always go and get checked & that these services would remain available, that’s obviously not been the case. I feel far more financial support should have been put in place to try and allow the NHS to better deal with such essential points of care. 

3. It isn’t one or other, there is no reason we can’t have restrictions that protect elderly, vulnerable people & invest more to try and limit events like this arising. That’s again me not claiming there is a catch all solution where no one dies, you were wrong in making that arrogant claim. 
4. elderly and people that are vulnerable due to health conditions shouldn’t be hung out to dry so you can have your summer holiday and go into a shop without wearing a mask. That’s where my ‘suck it up’ comment was aimed, let’s not forget you’ve regularly cried about restrictions because of your own personal impacts. ‘Suck it up’ was NOT at people needing vital medical checkups to mitigate serious medical conditions. Complete spin. 

8 hours ago, Sue Denim said:

People like @bazil85 thought that what they were supporting would have no downside. No we didn’t, I’d challenge you to find a single post that backs this up   

It was an opportunity to force their political agenda, to trash the economy and big business, blame the government and to signal their virtue. Completely wrong, politics is not the issue for me in this pandemic, human life is. Economy will always remain secondary to me compared to life.  

In reality, they have saved no-one, been complicit in the deaths of tens of thousands in the U.K., millions worldwide and ruined the livelihoods of millions of the working class and the poor. Your own stats don’t back this up. Every claim that lockdown would kill more people than the virus from you has been wrong. You’ve even resorted to trying to blame lockdown for political decisions that will cost lives, nonsense.   

Meanwhile the rich have got richer. Agree 

Lockdown is an assault on the working class by the middle class left working from home on full pay whilst offloading the burden of the pandemic into the poor and the vulnerable. For myself employed WFH, employed in an office, unemployed, personally financially struggling, none of these situations would change my priority being human life. This was an example of people like @oaksoft & you not being able to understand other views that don’t revolve around your selfish ones, where money in your pocket is the most important thing. It’s a foreign concept that some people will consider others. 

^^^Also completely wrong on multiple fronts (as above). You making stuff up won’t change that you have been proven wrong on many of your outlandish claims early in this pandemic. 

[Hendo]

1 hour ago, ALBIONSAINT said:

Yes at £75 a pop, there bloody loving this pandemic 😷 

How dare you criticise our brave GP's, at the forefront of this pandemic, doing their online consultations via zoom.

[bazil85]

3 hours ago, faraway saint said:

Yes, I also see the numbers as seeing the trends, which I said way back, the EXACT numbers, barring the personal grief for each family, are not critical.

As for the death certificate, again, if covid is mentioned is IS NOT necessarily the cause of death, therefore the numbers they produce are flawed.

You’re right, they will be flawed. On 17th November the excessive deaths during the pandemic was circa 70,000.

The death within 28 days stat isn’t perfect but it definitely shows the deadly impact of Covid19, there will be people dying with Covid19 as a major contributing factor outside of that parameter as well as people where it hasn’t been a major contributing factor within that parameter. 

my view of 80,000 deaths by mid January was using the four week reporting method. It’s seemingly beyond doubt looking at excessive deaths, the actual numbers (which we’ll likely never know) will be considerably higher than that. 

[Slarti]

I did answer your question - I clearly stated your hypothesis is dadaist and that I retain my opinion that the evidence on the death certificates (which you haven't seen) signed by a medical practitioner, tallied by the ONS and endorsed by the president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine is the correct figure....
.....and so the dance begins!

No, you never. Would it be classed as covid or non-covid? Also, SHOULD it be classed as covid or non-covid.

The fact that I haven't seen the death certificates is totally irrelevant. Nobody is saying that anybody is lying about what is on the death certificates.

I don't know why you have to keep repeating that bit in bold, nobody is disputing that is what happens.

It's the correct figure for what? Those who have covid mentioned on their death certificate? Nobody is disputing that, either. Those who have contracted covid and also died? Again, nobody is disputing that.

The point is that it is extremely likely that not everybody who has covid on their death certificate will have died of covid and that covid would not have been a contributing factor in the deaths of everyone who has it mentioned on their death certificate. If you think that is wrong or unlikely, then we will just need to agree that you have the right to hold whatever opinion you like, no matter how wrong or unlikely that opinion is.

For sake of clarity, I accept that all the death certificates mention covid and I accept that all those people contracted covid. I accept that the ONS is counting them accurately and that neither they, nor the GPS, are lying about anything. Now please stop trying to construct a strawman of my position, I won't indulge it.

[shull]

Never mind Tier 4.

A new Tier 5 on the way.

[shull]

New variant.

Two runny noses instead of one.

Hankies at the ready

And stay in.