Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19) and Tinnitus

[UKBloke]

Hello, UKBloke, nice to see someone who doesn't have me on ignore and who doesn't insult and mock me while claiming to have me on ignore, ask me a question.

Thanks for your reply. I will answer in a bit more detail later on but before I do that I want to put a question out to the other people in this thread. Can I say to those other people: if you're considering replying I respectfully ask that you don't post screen grabs of zillions of statistics or "Full Fact" rebuttals, or worse, pictures of people wearing tin foil hats. I'm asking you to look at the image below, and then using your emotional intelligence and reasoning, consider what the infographic is saying to you. By the way, this is a screengrab from the BBC. It's not my image, it's one I downloaded off of a Twitter user. I can attest to the BBC regularly broadcasting these images in their news items.

 

[Tanni]

I'm asking you to look at the image below, and then using your emotional intelligence and reasoning, consider what the infographic is saying to you. By the way, this is a screengrab from the BBC. It's not my image, it's one I downloaded off of a Twitter user. I can attest to the BBC regularly broadcasting these images in their news items.

View attachment 42696

Do you have a link to the original? Otherwise, this could be a screenshot from anywhere. It's far too closely cropped.

 

[Ed209]

I am disputing the official narrative and I have posted various examples sporadically in this thread. One problem is some readers have taken it upon themselves to mock, insult and ridicule me instead of really considering my perspective. This personal attack has also manifested itself in attacks based on posts on other topics which is totally irrelevant or should be.

Saying you dispute the official narrative is far better than saying it's a hoax. Nobody is denying anyone an opinion here, but lies or mistruths should always be corrected, and you've said a few things that have demonstrated your lack of understanding of the subject you were discussing. Also, I have been nothing but respectful to you, and even tried to help you many times in the past, but you've always been aggressive and rude with your responses, and not just with me, but with everyone. I mean you even laughed when I spoke about all the people I knew who had lost their lives.

I can understand why people would have you on ignore, however, I don't have anyone on ignore, because I like to hear everyone's opinions.

I encourage you to research for yourself and to do that, you have to go outside your comfort zone. You need to access other sources other than MSM and immediate Google hits. Those sources are not just biased but they are subjective and present an angle that omits the info you will find elsewhere. This is a red flag and the fact it's global is even more eye-opening. COVID-1984 is, so far, the best way, the best "slogan" if you will, to describe it. Although, "Plandemic" is pretty good, too.

Speaking for myself here, but I have read and seen most of the things you are talking about. If I research something, I try to remain as neutral as possible (because only the truth interests me and not a forced narrative in either direction). In other words, I try to follow the facts and observe what's going on in the real world. Bear in mind, that this also affects me financially, so it's probably in my interests to lean towards the conspiracists narrative.

You say your sources are not biased, but everything is biased to some degree. That's the problem. Being able to genuinely disassociate yourself is extremely difficult because most people make up their minds first and then go looking for information that supports their belief. We all do it. In fact, this is such a problem that intelligence agencies and big financial institutions have measures in place to help stop people falling into the confirmation bias trap. They do this because it can have devastating consequences on the economy and can destroy the integrity of a proper investigation.

The Yorkshire ripper, in the UK, was able to keep killing because of this human trait. The man who was the head of the police at the time was convinced that a tape - that was handed in - was legitimate; he believed it contained the killer's voice. He even believed the letters were real. He then convinced everyone else that they were real and informed all of his officers to let anyone go who was under suspicion who didn't have a Geordie accent. The police then spent millions advertising these letters and broadcasting the tape, nationwide. This not only led to many more unnecessary deaths - as women falsely believed they were safe when they heard a genuine Yorkshire accent - but they also let the real killer go, and on good evidence because his accent and handwriting didn't match! I've read many books on this subject and it's fascinating how flawed we all are without even realising it.

Getting back to the coronavirus, I'm in a position where I have access to many high-level medical professionals, and they have all told me, unanimously, how bad it has been. You cannot read this on a website. It's real life. I trust real life more than anything else due to its tangible nature. Data from trusted sources also back this up. I still try to remain neutral, but it is impossible to ignore evidence that is slapping you around the face. This would also mean that all my friends are pathological liars.

If you still want to believe that it's fake, then that's your prerogative, and you have every right to do so. All I'll say is go easy on the insults and people will engage with you in a more sincere manner.

 

[UKBloke]

Do you have a link to the original? Otherwise, this could be a screenshot from anywhere. It's far too closely cropped.

No I don't have a link to the original. But if you want to see an original with the latest data and imagery I've included it below. The number is now 80,868.

A video report (that may or may not be available for viewing to those outside the UK) from which the graphic below was grabbed can be watched here.

 

[Tanni]

No I don't have a link to the original. But if you want to see an original with the latest data and imagery I've included it below. The number is now 80,868.

A video report (that may or may not be available for viewing to those outside the UK) from which the graphic below was grabbed can be watched here.

View attachment 42701

Amazing, thank you. Definitely BBC.

Yeah, that's weird. Not sure why they are including all deaths. I can't even find an explanation for it online.

 

[Ed209]

Amazing, thank you. Definitely BBC.

Yeah, that's weird. Not sure why they are including all deaths. I can't even find an explanation for it online.

The best explanation is given here:

Defining a COVID-19 death

Although it might seem straightforward, counting the number of people who have died from COVID-19 related illness is complex.

The infection can lead to death soon after diagnosis, but it may also cause death many weeks later. Someone who tests positive can of course die from another cause such as cancer or heart disease at any time.

A death in someone who has tested positive becomes progressively less likely to be directly due to COVID-19 as time passes and more likely to be due to another cause. However, there is no agreed cut-off after which COVID-19 can be excluded as a likely cause and sadly, we know that some people die from their infection many weeks later. Coronavirus can also contribute to a death without being the main or "underlying" cause.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recognises this complexity and states that:

A COVID-19 death is defined for surveillance purposes as a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case, unless there is a clear alternative cause of death that cannot be related to COVID-19 disease (e.g. trauma).

This definition therefore requires a clinical assessment of each case.

For several months, the COVID-19 Data Dashboard has been reporting, for England, all deaths in people who have a positive test. This a robust measure as it uses the fact of a positive test and the fact of death to derive the number reported. However, it is only an approximation of the number of people who die from COVID-19 because other causes of death are included and some people who die from COVID-19 never had a positive test. It was decided to adopt this measure in April in order to be sure not to underestimate the number of COVID-19 related deaths. It was always intended to review the approach as the pandemic progressed.

The countries of the UK have been using slightly different methods. Scotland, for example, has only been counting deaths within 28 days of a positive test so that deaths from COVID-19 beyond 28 days are not included.

Behind the headlines: Counting COVID-19 deaths​

In other words, there is no perfect way to count the deaths and every country does it differently. Traumas would not be counted, i.e. if someone got hit by a bus that would not be recorded. Figuring out if COVID-19 was the cause of a fatal heart attack, for example, could be challenging. However, it is generally agreed that more are likely to die without having been prior tested, meaning the numbers lean towards being under-reported rather than over-reported. None of the early deaths would have been registered and there was a long period of time where they weren't testing anybody, meaning the numbers would have been very under-reported during that period.

It is an approximate figure rather than a razor sharp one.

It's an odd choice of words by the BBC, though, I'll admit that. But one thing's for sure, if they were trying to hide something, they definitely wouldn't give you that clarification.

 

[Tanni]

Traumas would not be counted, i.e. if someone got hit by a bus that would not be recorded.

Thanks Ed, that's great - and exactly what I expected the explanation to be. However, if it's true that they're not including obviously unrelated deaths like the above, they should definitely change their wording as it makes it sound like they are.

Unless they are including unrelated deaths to make up for the fact that some people die of COVID-19 without having a test?

It's not very clear, either way.

 

[Ed209]

Thanks Ed, that's great - and exactly what I expected the explanation to be. However, if it's true that they're not including obviously unrelated deaths like the above, they should definitely change their wording as it makes it sound like they are.

Unless they are including unrelated deaths to make up for the fact that some people die of COVID-19 without having a test?

It's not very clear, either way.

The explanation above is directly from the UK government, and it's how the deaths are actually recorded. The BBC's clarification is just poorly worded; probably because of the word count. What they actually mean is all deaths that follow the criteria.

 

[Ed209]

I think it's worth including the rest of the article as it includes more details:

Does this mean you have overcounted deaths from COVID-19 in England?

The total number of deaths reported in the daily numbers is less than the total number of deaths registered with COVID-19 on the death certificate, so the numbers reported have not generally been an over estimate. However, in recent weeks the numbers of deaths in people who have tested positive have become substantially greater than the numbers of deaths subsequently registered as COVID-19 deaths by the ONS, which is why we are now changing our approach to reporting deaths.

What did the review look at?

Our review considered epidemiological evidence to see how likely it was that COVID-19 was a contributory factor to a death at different points in time after a positive test. We examined all 41,598 deaths in confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported up to 3 August 2020 and found that:

• 88% of deaths occurred within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test and 96% occurred within 60 days or had COVID-19 on the death certificate
• of those who died 29 to 60 days after their positive test, COVID-19 was included on the death certificate for 64%
• 2,295 (54%) of the 4,219 deaths excluded by a 28-day time limit had COVID-19 on the death certificate
• overall 91% of deaths reported by PHE in confirmed cases up to 3 August had COVID-19 on the death certificate

What is changing?

Two new deaths indicators will now be used by all four nations in the UK to provide a full picture of both recent trends and the longer-term burden of the disease.

The additional indicators which will be used to calculate daily death figures are:

• the number of deaths in people with COVID-19 that occur within 28 days of a first positive laboratory-confirmed test. This is intended to provide a headline indicator of the immediate impact of recent epidemic activity. Deaths that occur more than 28 days after a positive test will not be included in this count.
• the number of deaths that occur within 60 days of a first positive test. Deaths that occur after 60 days will also be added to this figure if COVID-19 appears on the death certificate. This will provide a more complete measure of the burden of the disease over time.

Using these new measures, the total number of deaths in people with laboratory-confirmed infection is reduced by 5,377 if only deaths within 28-day of a test are included, and by 1,668 if including only deaths within 60 days or at any time with COVID-19 mentioned on the death certificate.

This approach has been peer reviewed by external statistical experts.​

I can now see why the BBC state "all deaths after 28 days." It is obviously to distinguish that the figure is from the 28-day data-set and not the 60-day one.

It is still a bit misleading, though.

 

[Ed209]

A new strain has been discovered in Japan that appears to have originated in Brazil. My wife believes that this could be due to the Oxford vaccine, as South Africa, Brazil, and the UK, are all places in which their trials took place, and these are also the locations in which mutant strains are springing up.

Clinical development of the potential vaccine is progressing globally with late-stage Phase II/III trials ongoing in the UK and Brazil, a Phase I/II trial in South Africa and planned trials in Japan and Russia. These, together with the US Phase III clinical trial will enrol up to 50,000 participants globally. Results from the late-stage trials are anticipated later this year, depending on the rate of infection within the clinical trial communities.

https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-c...e-iii-clinical-trial-initiated-in-the-us.html

 

[PeteJ]

A global team of experts has found 10 FATAL FLAWS in the main test for Covid and is demanding it's urgently axed. As they should

 

[UKBloke]

I honestly think it's bizarre that there's still confusion surrounding my perspective by now but if you haven't followed my posts, I guess I can understand.

I didn't follow your posts closely to be honest. I did see something mentioned early on about a "plandemic" but shortly after that various arguments began brewing so I didn't look at the thread again for a while.

As I spoke about in the vaccine thread, I've been very dubious about this situation since reports, images and videos of people collapsing on the streets of Wuhan began circulating in the western press early January 2020. Today I sit writing to you from England nearly one year on where we are currently in Lockdown 3. There are now rumours circulating that the government is considering curfews, the abolition of what they call "support bubbles" (which will leave those living alone, now completely alone), and there is also talk of us only being "allowed" out of our homes once per week. 2021's got off to a flying start.

Whether or not there's something "fishy" going on is for me as much wrapped up in the question of whether or not government response is proportionate to the threat given the initial risks from the virus we were told vs. the outcomes. Personally I think it's incumbent on every person to consider this question, however, by doing so we need to keep in mind all aspects of the "disease", from testing for SARS-CoV-2 through to clinical diagnosis of the actual disease known as COVID-19, and all of the numbers in between. At this point I don't think it's possible to have that conversation online anymore because the opposing camps are too divided. It's a journey for oneself.

 

[Jack V]

You're not smart enough to see that opportunistic people and institutions use the pandemic in nefarious ways because they can, and that there are widespread lies and confusion about the situation from every side?

You have a very simple understanding of the world.

Smart people know the pandemic is all too real, and the notion that it's a hoax or conspiracy is false.

Sorry, but this one is not a gray area.

 

[Lane]

the notion that it's a hoax or conspiracy is false.

Not trying to speak for @HeavyMantra, but I don't think he was saying it was a hoax. I think he's saying what I myself believe, that there are widespread lies and confusion from various sources. My biggest complaint is that conventional medicine has given virtually no credence (or support) to nutrition.

Science seems to have clearly demonstrated that if critical nutrients are adequately addressed from both preventative and treatment angles, it could almost immediately turn the pandemic from a major, major issue, to one that can be handled relatively easily (compared to the crisis that is currently unfolding).

I truly think conventional medicine is fearful of this kind of knowledge being widely disseminated, because then people will begin to understand that optimal nutrition is also able to address many other health issues. In the U.S., that could mean untold amounts of money no longer being funneled into the monstrous (as in size) health care system here.

 

[PeteJ]

I didn't follow your posts closely to be honest. I did see something mentioned early on about a "plandemic" but shortly after that various arguments began brewing so I didn't look at the thread again for a while.

As I spoke about in the vaccine thread, I've been very dubious about this situation since reports, images and videos of people collapsing on the streets of Wuhan began circulating in the western press early January 2020. Today I sit writing to you from England nearly one year on where we are currently in Lockdown 3. There are now rumours circulating that the government is considering curfews, the abolition of what they call "support bubbles" (which will leave those living alone, now completely alone), and there is also talk of us only being "allowed" out of our homes once per week. 2021's got off to a flying start.

Whether or not there's something "fishy" going on is for me as much wrapped up in the question of whether or not government response is proportionate to the threat given the initial risks from the virus we were told vs. the outcomes. Personally I think it's incumbent on every person to consider this question, however, by doing so we need to keep in mind all aspects of the "disease", from testing for SARS-CoV-2 through to clinical diagnosis of the actual disease known as COVID-19, and all of the numbers in between. At this point I don't think it's possible to have that conversation online anymore because the opposing camps are too divided. It's a journey for oneself.

You will get a curfew. So will my province in Canada, Ontario. The province of Quebec already has a curfew. If you are out past it, they will try to fine you $1000 or more. Look at the draconian measures in Australia. They arrest you automatically if you question or challenge the police state there. They rip mothers away from their kids and arrest them.

You don't seem interested in doing your own research so not much more to say.

 

[UKBloke]

You don't seem interested in doing your own research so not much more to say.

I would wager I've done as much if not more research than you. What I'm not interested in doing is, posting all of my comments and thoughts on here. Suffice to say, I'm happy that between this thread and the vaccine one, I've posted enough.

 

[HeavyMantra]

Smart people know the pandemic is all too real, and the notion that it's a hoax or conspiracy is false.

Sorry, but this one is not a gray area.

I'm baffled that you can't even imagine an area in between those two extremes, regardless of your opinion on the matter. Do you believe the official Chinese statistics of cases in their country for instance? Can you see that yes, the virus is very real, but their numbers are lies? Can you apply the same concept to other situations, statistical or otherwise, in whatever country you live in? If you don't see the lies and propaganda (good or otherwise, about anything not just COVID-19) popping out at you whenever you turn on the TV or open a newspaper, I honestly don't know what to tell you. That's on the same level as people thinking 5G spreads COVID-19 as far as I'm concerned. I could be wrong. Most people are wrong about many things and I'm no exception.

There will be winners and losers in the aftermath of this. That's what I'm talking about, not if the virus is a hoax or not. Consider 9/11: regardless if you think that happened just like the mainstream narrative says, surely you must see that the US government could have taken an advantage of the situation to invade other countries for unrelated reasons? It's not a matter of choosing to believe one of two extremes (one being the mainstream narrative, the other being that the whole thing was an inside job), it's about realizing governments, companies, culture in general aren't always on your side and aren't always good.

 

[HeavyMantra]

It's a weird place to ask I guess but I might as well: exactly how big of a risk am I taking if I work surrounded by large amounts of people (occasionally as close as 1-2 meters away), wearing a visor and mask and washing my hands constantly? I did catch the virus in my workplace but it took 10 months before I did, and I never wore a mask just like almost nobody else in Sweden did at the time. We're only talking 24 work hours a month + travelling there.

After getting the virus but not developing antibodies I have to make a choice to gut a huge chunk of my income or not. As people here probably understand, no money in the world is worth worsening tinnitus as much as COVID-19 did for me.

 

[PeteJ]

I would wager I've done as much if not more research than you. What I'm not interested in doing is, posting all of my comments and thoughts on here. Suffice to say, I'm happy that between this thread and the vaccine one, I've posted enough.

I'd wager you haven't.

 

[Lane]

exactly how big of a risk am I taking

Hi @HeavyMantra -- I don't know the answer to that, but I myself feel very confident that the preventative measures I take reduces my odds of getting COVID-19 by at least 90%+. And the natural therapeutic measures I have in mind if I were to contract it also makes me feel confident I would likely be able to keep it to at least a moderate case, if not totally asymptomatic. I think if you did something similar to what I'm doing, then your risk would be relatively low.

Here's a link to a POST I made in which I outlined some of my strategies. Fortunately, I'm able to greatly minimize the amount of contact I have with crowded indoor environments, which also increases my comfort level about my odds of becoming infected. That would make it a different situation than what you describe for yourself.

I consider my strategies to be pretty simple, and something anybody could emulate. And btw, they aren't all original, but a hodgepodge of different strategies I've read about that a number of doctors are using successfully with their patients. -- I believe this kind of information should be at the top of the evening news every night of the week. But it won't happen, because they get the bulk of their ad revenue from pharmaceutical companies.

P.S. It apparently normally takes the coronavirus anywhere from 24-72 hours to travel from the sinuses and throat down to the upper respiratory tract. It's a time when it's most vulnerable to heat, which is a big factor since it has a relatively low kill temperature of 134 degrees F (don't know what the Centigrade number is).

You may want to consider investing in a portable far or near infrared sauna. Not only would it likely be able to kill any viruses you may have come in contact with in your work environment, but would give many other health benefits as well. I met a DC one time who did saunas religiously, and he said he prefers short 5-10 min saunas over the traditional longer ones of 30 minutes or more. So it doesn't necessarily have to be overly time consuming.

 

[PeteJ]

Hi @HeavyMantra -- I don't know the answer to that, but I myself feel very confident that the preventative measures I take reduces my odds of getting COVID-19 by at least 90%+. And the natural therapeutic measures I have in mind if I were to contract it also makes me feel confident I would likely be able to keep it to at least a moderate case, if not totally asymptomatic. I think if you did something similar to what I'm doing, then your risk would be relatively low.

Here's a link to a POST I made in which I outlined some of my strategies. Fortunately, I'm able to greatly minimize the amount of contact I have with crowded indoor environments, which also increases my comfort level about my odds of becoming infected. That would make it a different situation than what you describe for yourself.

I consider my strategies to be pretty simple, and something anybody could emulate. And btw, they aren't all original, but a hodgepodge of different strategies I've read about that a number of doctors are using successfully with their patients. -- I believe this kind of information should be at the top of the evening news every night of the week. But it won't happen, because they get the bulk of their ad revenue from pharmaceutical companies.

P.S. It apparently normally takes the coronavirus anywhere from 24-72 hours to travel from the sinuses and throat down to the upper respiratory tract. It's a time when it's most vulnerable to heat, which is a big factor since it has a relatively low kill temperature of 134 degrees F (don't know what the Centigrade number is).

You may want to consider investing in a portable far or near infrared sauna. Not only would it likely be able to kill any viruses you may have come in contact with in your work environment, but would give many other health benefits as well. I met a DC one time who did saunas religiously, and he said he prefers short 5-10 min saunas over the traditional longer ones of 30 minutes or more. So it doesn't necessarily have to be overly time consuming.

LOL! Or you could eat right, exercise, take vitamin C and try to get adequate sleep. Other ways to escape the magic virus.

 

[Sevv]

It's a weird place to ask I guess but I might as well: exactly how big of a risk am I taking if I work surrounded by large amounts of people (occasionally as close as 1-2 meters away), wearing a visor and mask and washing my hands constantly? I did catch the virus in my workplace but it took 10 months before I did, and I never wore a mask just like almost nobody else in Sweden did at the time. We're only talking 24 work hours a month + travelling there.

After getting the virus but not developing antibodies I have to make a choice to gut a huge chunk of my income or not. As people here probably understand, no money in the world is worth worsening tinnitus as much as COVID-19 did for me.

How big is the room, for how long is one of those other people staying in the room before leaving and how well ventilated is the room?

 

[Psych]

Hello, UKBloke, nice to see someone who doesn't have me on ignore and who doesn't insult and mock me while claiming to have me on ignore, ask me a question.

I honestly think it's bizarre that there's still confusion surrounding my perspective by now but if you haven't followed my posts, I guess I can understand.

I am disputing the official narrative and I have posted various examples sporadically in this thread. One problem is some readers have taken it upon themselves to mock, insult and ridicule me instead of really considering my perspective. This personal attack has also manifested itself in attacks based on posts on other topics which is totally irrelevant or should be. You can read their posts here and decide for yourself.

But, I digress. If you research, with an open mind, it should be inevitable that you recognize a major problem with the official narrative. The censorship of questioning the official narrative, notwithstanding, it just doesn't make sense and there's been way too many contradictions and lies. In addition to that, there are increasing numbers of health professionals disputing the official narrative. These include doctors, virologists, epidemiologists, nurses and others, who have presented contradictory data and facts that call into question what we are told.

On top of that, our freedoms are being infringed upon justified by the repetitive excuse, "it's for our safety." It's being drilled into people's brains that if you question what's going on, you are a horrible person, you lack empathy and you are a 'conspiracy theorist." People are being conditioned to blindly follow the government, to sacrifice their freedoms and don't question anything, don't challenge anything because the public health departments and hospitals are 'verifying' everything. Yet, these institutions we rely on and trust have been caught in lies repeatedly.

Something is fishy and not right.

I encourage you to research for yourself and to do that, you have to go outside your comfort zone. You need to access other sources other than MSM and immediate Google hits. Those sources are not just biased but they are subjective and present an angle that omits the info you will find elsewhere. This is a red flag and the fact it's global is even more eye-opening. COVID-1984 is, so far, the best way, the best "slogan" if you will, to describe it. Although, "Plandemic" is pretty good, too.

It's like living in a zombie movie.

 

[Ed209]

Our local hospital is at breaking point and was recently featured on a nationwide TV show. I can assure everyone that it's not the mainstream media creating spin, because I already knew everything that was reported, and it was all true.

Two of the parents at the nursery where my sister-in-law works are in induced comas, on a ventilator, and so is a relative of my mom's best friend.

I received a message from a friend of mine today who was as skeptical as PeteJ and Bill Bauer; he believed all the hoax propaganda that was being spread across social media. However, now that it is ripping through his work place, and he has come face-to-face with it, he has done a complete 180. As I said, seeing and knowing is believing.

His messages are the grey ones:

I think this post from a friend of my sister-in-law is quite sobering:

I agree with the first comment:

I caught this on the news last night. They said that the deaths last year were the highest total since the 1918 Spanish flu outbreak.

They do not account for the population increase, though. If you do you end up with this:

The reason why statisticians use the 5-year average - which Bill Bauer criticised - is to account for the fact that modern medicine has drastically reduced the mortality rates, even as much as going back 20 years. That's what makes the current increase in excess deaths rather alarming, and yet people still think it's all fake!

The spike on that chart doesn't even represent an entire year. Imagine what the numbers could have been without a single lockdown.

 

[UKBloke]

@Tanni
@Ed209

Re the BBC report, I don't believe they're even trying to hide anything. The report is factually correct. The problem is, the numbers are based on extremely questionable, some are saying, fraudulent, use of the PCR test.

The government isn't helping matters because it's own guidelines are full of contradictions. At one point we were told that a diagnosis of the disease COVID-19 can only be made after a person tested positive for the presence of a certain part of the virus known as SARS-CoV-2. Yet still the government states: some people who die from COVID-19 never had a positive test.

Contradictions like these are outrageous and I don't know what it's going to take for large enough numbers of people to start questioning them, especially given the destructive public policies enacted as a result.

 

[Ed209]

@Tanni
@Ed209

Re the BBC report, I don't believe they're even trying to hide anything. The report is factually correct. The problem is, the numbers are based on extremely questionable, some are saying, fraudulent, use of the PCR test.

The government isn't helping matters because its own guidelines are full of contradictions. At one point we were told that a diagnosis of the disease COVID-19 can only be made after a person tested positive for the presence of a certain part of the virus known as SARS-CoV-2. Yet still the government states: some people who die from COVID-19 never had a positive test.

Contradictions like these are outrageous and I don't know what it's going to take for large enough numbers of people to start questioning them, especially given the destructive public policies enacted as a result.

SARS-CoV-2 is the scientific name for the virus. COVID-19 is what they call the disease it causes. The PCR test is circa 98% effective at detecting the viruses RNA. It cannot indicate whether one has a live infection or not (only a viral culture can do that), but the presence of the RNA on a swab indicates the person has almost certainly had it within a given window. If somebody dies in a hospital, it would be much easier to confirm that it was indeed COVID-19 that caused it based on a clinical diagnosis as well as a positive swab. Those who have witnessed people dying of this are having nightmares about it, and are crying at work. Seeing people gasping for air and begging to be helped is making people crack up because we are now at a stage where those on the frontline are having to choose whose life they are going to attempt to save, whilst somebody else screams and begs to be treated. This will lead to all kinds of PTSD for the staff involved, and if they dare venture online, they have to put up with all the silly nonsense that the conspiracy theorists are constantly throwing out.

The most important figure is the excess deaths, and it's clear via these figures that the PCR tests are in the right ballpark. They claim 83,203 have died (that were known to be positive via a PCR test and a clinical diagnosis). The excess deaths are circa 80,000, and that's with lockdowns and isn't based on a full year. My friend had exactly the same views as you (in my post above), he often talked about the PCR test and all the other usual stuff, but then his opinion abruptly changed when it started to go through his workplace, putting his friends into the hospital.

The whole PCR test argument is pointless, in my opinion. There is no alternative to it, and in the meantime, we know people are dying and being put on life support because of COVID-19. Why does it matter to people so much? The stuff I'm hearing is horrifying, and that's why I post here, to try and make people see sense.

 

[Ed209]

The government isn't helping matters because it's own guidelines are full of contradictions. At one point we were told that a diagnosis of the disease COVID-19 can only be made after a person tested positive for the presence of a certain part of the virus known as SARS-CoV-2. Yet still the government states: some people who die from COVID-19 never had a positive test.

You are forgetting that up to 29% have a false negative with a PCR test. So, saying some die without having a positive test is true.

I'm still not sure where the contradictions are in your statement? SARS-CoV-2 isn't a certain part of the virus, it is the virus. You must have mis-read or misunderstood something.

 

[UKBloke]

SARS-CoV-2 is the scientific name for the virus. COVID-19 is what they call the disease it causes. The PCR test is circa 98% effective at detecting the viruses RNA. It cannot indicate whether one has a live infection or not (only a viral culture can do that), but the presence of the RNA on a swab indicates the person has almost certainly had it within a given window. If somebody dies in a hospital, it would be much easier to confirm that it was indeed COVID-19 that caused it based on a clinical diagnosis as well as a positive swab. Those who have witnessed people dying of this are having nightmares about it, and are crying at work. Seeing people gasping for air and begging to be helped is making people crack up because we are now at a stage where those on the frontline are having to choose whose life they are going to attempt to save, whilst somebody else screams and begs to be treated. This will lead to all kinds of PTSD for the staff involved, and if they dare venture online, they have to put up with all the silly nonsense that the conspiracy theorists are constantly throwing out.

The most important figure is the excess deaths, and it's clear via these figures that the PCR tests are in the right ballpark. They claim 83,203 have died (that were known to be positive via a PCR test and a clinical diagnosis). The excess deaths are circa 80,000, and that's with lockdowns and isn't based on a full year. My friend had exactly the same views as you (in my post above), he often talked about the PCR test and all the other usual stuff, but then his opinion abruptly changed when it started to go through his workplace, putting his friends into the hospital.

The whole PCR test argument is pointless, in my opinion. There is no alternative to it, and in the meantime, we know people are dying and being put on life support because of COVID-19. Why does it matter to people so much? The stuff I'm hearing is horrifying, and that's why I post here, to try and make people see sense.

We have to be straight about this. Dying within 28 days of a positive PCR test is not a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. I have seen copies of FOI requests from at least two health authorities, one in Wales, one in Scotland where the question was asked, how many people have died where only COVID-19 was mentioned on the death certificate? NHS Tayside stated that between 1st February 2020 and 20th December 2020 there were 6 deaths where COVID-19 was the only reason mentioned on the death certificate. The Welsh figure over 3 x hospital sites was 23. These huge discrepancies in figures are mainly an issue with dodgy non-standardised PCR testing and the way death certificates are filled out. I can't understand why anyone would not want to square the figures up and get to the bottom of that.

A lot of your comments contain emotional bias. We know people are suffering with the disease. I have no dispute about that. I also, as I've previously stated am very clear that something went through the population last year and killed many elderly and vulnerable people. But in the face of the public policies that have since terrorised a generation of children, who themselves will suffer PTSD as a result, policies that are now going to, from the latest estimates I've seen, destroy a quarter of a million small businesses, behind which will be (as you and I know being small business owners) at least one person who will suffer the fallout from that, then in my opinion, everybody now has the duty to question the narrative. The main premise should be, given the appalling suffering that lockdowns have inflicted, have the numbers and ultimately the devastation COVID-19 was projected to do, been overstated? A question like this has nothing to do with conspiracy theories. It is the most logical question to consider at this moment in time, as any intelligent person knows.

 

[UKBloke]

I'm still not sure where the contradictions are in your statement? SARS-CoV-2 isn't a certain part of the virus, it is the virus. You must have mis-read or misunderstood something.

I don't mean to be condescending Ed, but I'm not going to spoonfeed you on this point. There are plenty of papers out there that describe exactly how the Corman/Drosten protocol applies to PCR when testing for SARS-CoV-2.

 

[Ed209]

I don't mean to be condescending Ed, but I'm not going to spoonfeed you on this point. There are plenty of papers out there that describe exactly how the Corman/Drosten protocol applies to PCR when testing for SARS-CoV-2.

You don't have to. I don't see the point. I don't understand why people are so concerned about the PCR test results when the mortality and excess death rates last year clearly and overwhelmingly show there is a big problem. These are objective data.

The question is, why are people focussing on these peripheral issues, and not the problem itself?

Those I've seen who use the PCR test argument almost always believe that COVID-19 is a hoax, or some kind of agenda to bring in the new world order. It's utter nonsense.