FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Virus

Standardising covid recording

Jump to newest
 

By *lowstick66 OP   Man
over a year ago

m

At the start of the pandemic, if you had been tested positive for covid and then died of an unrelated cause, being ran over by a bus for instance, it was recorded that you had died with covid.

So by the same token, to be fair and equal, if someone dies having had the vaccine of an unrelated cause, shouldn’t it be recorded as having died having had the vaccine? Otherwise the figures just can’t be compared.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

At the start of the pandemic, we were getting figures of infections and deaths from “Covid-19” and now the figures are quoting “Coronavirus” Most people don’t realise that Coronavirus covers a whole load of viruses, not just Covid-19 but also influenza and many relatively harmless viruses.

They don’t want the figures to be comparable because they want us to be in the dark and rely on the fact that most people don’t question what they are told and don’t really notice when key words are being changed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

Why would you put down false causes of death? That seems utterly irrational.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Why would you put down false causes of death? That seems utterly irrational."

It's the same irrational claim that our and other countries governments are involved in some 'plan'..

Baseless and without foundation..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"Why would you put down false causes of death? That seems utterly irrational.

It's the same irrational claim that our and other countries governments are involved in some 'plan'..

Baseless and without foundation.."

Oh. Covid is just a sniffle but asymptomatic shedding of spike protein exists and is a gigantic threat. Death counts in a crisis must be more accurate than our normal expectation for death certificates, but we should inflate vaccine injury because... It'll make some people feel better.

Gotcha.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Why would you put down false causes of death? That seems utterly irrational.

It's the same irrational claim that our and other countries governments are involved in some 'plan'..

Baseless and without foundation..

Oh. Covid is just a sniffle but asymptomatic shedding of spike protein exists and is a gigantic threat. Death counts in a crisis must be more accurate than our normal expectation for death certificates, but we should inflate vaccine injury because... It'll make some people feel better.

Gotcha."

Who knew buses would be the go to for disinformation ..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *orwegian BlueMan
over a year ago

Iceland, but Aldi is closer..

Is it not as simple and innocuous as when the death rates were at their worst, its extremely difficult to ascertain the exact cause of death without post mortem examination, therefore it is a simple solution to state covid as the cause of death if someone has had it, even though they may have died from an other underlying cause such as heart failure or Parkinson's.

The downside to this is it has inflated the reported numbers of deaths from covid..

I am aware of other countries medical staff being told not to quote covid as the cause of death if the person had an underlying illness that caused their death, even if it was brought on prematurely by covid.

It is however only a metric to measure how well or poorly, as a country the epidemic is being controlled and should not be compared to other countries; its not a true comparison.

Whatever way you look at it, always bear in mind that statiticially, 99% of statistics are made up.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"At the start of the pandemic, if you had been tested positive for covid and then died of an unrelated cause, being ran over by a bus for instance, it was recorded that you had died with covid.

So by the same token, to be fair and equal, if someone dies having had the vaccine of an unrelated cause, shouldn’t it be recorded as having died having had the vaccine? Otherwise the figures just can’t be compared. "

Yes, Covid deaths the Gov accepted were likely to be at least 30% over-estimated because of the overly high amplification, which WHO announced should be reduced a couple of months ago, and there were many anecdotal reports of Covid being on death certificate of elderly patients who died of something totally unrelated, or were admitted to hospital for an entirely unrelated condition and caught it there.

The converse is not true for the thousands of post-vaccine deaths, which are often unreported and usually dismissed as coincidental to avoid causing vaccine skepticism at all cost.

A recent 42 page paper in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research concluded:

Experimental mRNA vaccines have been heralded as having the potential for great benefits, but they also harbor the possibility of potentially tragic andeven catastrophic unforeseen consequences. The mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been implemented with great fanfare, but there are many aspects of their widespread utilization that merit concern. We have reviewed some, but not all, of those concerns here, and we want to emphasize that these concerns are potentially serious and might not be evident for years or even transgenerationally. In order to adequately rule out the adverse potentialities described in this paper, we recommend, at a minimum, that the following research and surveillance practices be adopted:

•A national effort to collect detailed data on adverse events associated with the mRNA vaccines with abundant funding allocation, tracked well beyond the first couple of weeks after vaccination.

* Repeated autoantibody testing of the vaccine-recipient population. The autoantibodies tested could be standardized and should be based upon previously documented antibodies and autoantibodies potentially elicited by the spike protein. These include autoantibodies against phospholipids, collagen, actin, thyroperoxidase (TPO), myelin basic protein, tissue transglutaminase, and perhaps others.•Immunological profiling related to cytokine balance and related biological effects. Tests should include, at a minimum, IL-6, INF-a, D-dimer, fibrinogen, and C-reactive protein.

•Studies comparing populations who were vaccinated with the mRNA vaccines and those who were not to confirm the expected decreased infection rate and milder symptoms of the vaccinated group, whileat the same time comparing the rates of various autoimmune diseases and prion diseases in the same two populations.

•Studies to assess whether it is possible for an unvaccinated person to acquire vaccine-specific forms of the spike proteins from a vaccinated person in close proximity.

•In vitro studies to assess whether the mRNA nanoparticles can be taken up by sperm and converted into cDNA plasmids.

* Animal studies to determine whether vaccination shortly before conception can result in offspring carrying spike-protein-encoding plasmids in their tissues, possibly integrated into their genome.

•In vitro studies aimed to better understand the toxicity of the spike protein to the brain, heart, testes, etc.

Public policy around mass vaccination has generally proceeded on the assumption that the risk/benefit ratio for the novel mRNA vaccines is a “slam dunk.” With the massive vaccination campaign well under way in response to the declared international emergency of COVID-19, we have rushed into vaccine experiments on a world-wide scale. At the very least, we should take advantage of the data that are available from these experiments to learn more about this new and previously untested technology. And, in the future, we urge governments to proceed with more caution inthe face of new biotechnologies.

Finally, as an obvious but tragically ignored suggestion, the government should also be encouraging the population to take safe and affordable steps to boost their immune systems naturally, such as getting out in the sunlight to raise vitamin D levels (Ali, 2020), and eating mainly organic whole foods rather than chemical-laden processed foods (Rico-Campà et al., 2019). Also, eating foods that are good sources of vitamin A, vitamin C and vitamin K2 should be encouraged, as deficiencies in these vitamins are linked to bad outcomes from COVID-1

.....

So yes, much more accurate andin-depth data collection and analysis is required, particularly before the topic are targeted.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"At the start of the pandemic, if you had been tested positive for covid and then died of an unrelated cause, being ran over by a bus for instance, it was recorded that you had died with covid.

So by the same token, to be fair and equal, if someone dies having had the vaccine of an unrelated cause, shouldn’t it be recorded as having died having had the vaccine? Otherwise the figures just can’t be compared.

Yes, Covid deaths the Gov accepted were likely to be at least 30% over-estimated because of the overly high amplification, which WHO announced should be reduced a couple of months ago, and there were many anecdotal reports of Covid being on death certificate of elderly patients who died of something totally unrelated, or were admitted to hospital for an entirely unrelated condition and caught it there.

The converse is not true for the thousands of post-vaccine deaths, which are often unreported and usually dismissed as coincidental to avoid causing vaccine skepticism at all cost.

A recent 42 page paper in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research concluded:

Experimental mRNA vaccines have been heralded as having the potential for great benefits, but they also harbor the possibility of potentially tragic andeven catastrophic unforeseen consequences. The mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been implemented with great fanfare, but there are many aspects of their widespread utilization that merit concern. We have reviewed some, but not all, of those concerns here, and we want to emphasize that these concerns are potentially serious and might not be evident for years or even transgenerationally. In order to adequately rule out the adverse potentialities described in this paper, we recommend, at a minimum, that the following research and surveillance practices be adopted:

•A national effort to collect detailed data on adverse events associated with the mRNA vaccines with abundant funding allocation, tracked well beyond the first couple of weeks after vaccination.

* Repeated autoantibody testing of the vaccine-recipient population. The autoantibodies tested could be standardized and should be based upon previously documented antibodies and autoantibodies potentially elicited by the spike protein. These include autoantibodies against phospholipids, collagen, actin, thyroperoxidase (TPO), myelin basic protein, tissue transglutaminase, and perhaps others.•Immunological profiling related to cytokine balance and related biological effects. Tests should include, at a minimum, IL-6, INF-a, D-dimer, fibrinogen, and C-reactive protein.

•Studies comparing populations who were vaccinated with the mRNA vaccines and those who were not to confirm the expected decreased infection rate and milder symptoms of the vaccinated group, whileat the same time comparing the rates of various autoimmune diseases and prion diseases in the same two populations.

•Studies to assess whether it is possible for an unvaccinated person to acquire vaccine-specific forms of the spike proteins from a vaccinated person in close proximity.

•In vitro studies to assess whether the mRNA nanoparticles can be taken up by sperm and converted into cDNA plasmids.

* Animal studies to determine whether vaccination shortly before conception can result in offspring carrying spike-protein-encoding plasmids in their tissues, possibly integrated into their genome.

•In vitro studies aimed to better understand the toxicity of the spike protein to the brain, heart, testes, etc.

Public policy around mass vaccination has generally proceeded on the assumption that the risk/benefit ratio for the novel mRNA vaccines is a “slam dunk.” With the massive vaccination campaign well under way in response to the declared international emergency of COVID-19, we have rushed into vaccine experiments on a world-wide scale. At the very least, we should take advantage of the data that are available from these experiments to learn more about this new and previously untested technology. And, in the future, we urge governments to proceed with more caution inthe face of new biotechnologies.

Finally, as an obvious but tragically ignored suggestion, the government should also be encouraging the population to take safe and affordable steps to boost their immune systems naturally, such as getting out in the sunlight to raise vitamin D levels (Ali, 2020), and eating mainly organic whole foods rather than chemical-laden processed foods (Rico-Campà et al., 2019). Also, eating foods that are good sources of vitamin A, vitamin C and vitamin K2 should be encouraged, as deficiencies in these vitamins are linked to bad outcomes from COVID-1

.....

So yes, much more accurate andin-depth data collection and analysis is required, particularly before the topic are targeted.

"

Before the YOUNG are targeted that should read.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle


"Why would you put down false causes of death? That seems utterly irrational."

I believe it's down to some kind of cover up it's known to be done which is nothing new and taking away the responsibility Happens all the time, panorama was interesting last night surrounding this kind of thing

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"Why would you put down false causes of death? That seems utterly irrational.

It's the same irrational claim that our and other countries governments are involved in some 'plan'..

Baseless and without foundation..

Oh. Covid is just a sniffle but asymptomatic shedding of spike protein exists and is a gigantic threat. Death counts in a crisis must be more accurate than our normal expectation for death certificates, but we should inflate vaccine injury because... It'll make some people feel better.

Gotcha.

Who knew buses would be the go to for disinformation .."

In shit no one would have believed in 2019...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Why would you put down false causes of death? That seems utterly irrational."

This is a great question and one I would love an answer to. I can’t see a reason for artificially increasing the figures but lots of evidence that it’s happening.

I registered a death last year from covid and the registrar wanted me to confirm the cause of death because the registry office were so concerned about the number of deaths they were being told by hospitals were caused by covid that were not they were no longer taking a doctors word for cause of death.

This and the fact counts of Covid have been replaced by counts of Coronavirus and at Christmas time they we’re claiming over 5% (figures as high as 10%) of the population were infected yet the actual numbers didn’t add up to anything near that made it clear to anyone who was prepared to note the figures and tap them into a calculator.

I would dearly love a definitive reason the figures are being manipulated but as far as I can see the most likely reason is that most of the political parties are being funded by pharmaceutical companies.

Another thing I want to know is why hospital patients who had tested negative were being transferred between red and green wards because I can only think of one reason to do that and I really don’t want to believe it is the case.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icplshropsCouple
over a year ago

Rock

Never mind the post, just loving the 'Priti Patel's Sex Dungeon'

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Why would you put down false causes of death? That seems utterly irrational.

This is a great question and one I would love an answer to. I can’t see a reason for artificially increasing the figures but lots of evidence that it’s happening.

I registered a death last year from covid and the registrar wanted me to confirm the cause of death because the registry office were so concerned about the number of deaths they were being told by hospitals were caused by covid that were not they were no longer taking a doctors word for cause of death.

This and the fact counts of Covid have been replaced by counts of Coronavirus and at Christmas time they we’re claiming over 5% (figures as high as 10%) of the population were infected yet the actual numbers didn’t add up to anything near that made it clear to anyone who was prepared to note the figures and tap them into a calculator.

I would dearly love a definitive reason the figures are being manipulated but as far as I can see the most likely reason is that most of the political parties are being funded by pharmaceutical companies.

Another thing I want to know is why hospital patients who had tested negative were being transferred between red and green wards because I can only think of one reason to do that and I really don’t want to believe it is the case."

How would the registration officials know that what was written and signed by two doctors wasn't the cause of death plus the contributing factors?

The registrar at your and my local registration office is not medically qualified..

The next level up in the coroner's office usually is, and as a family we've had an issue where the information on the certificate needed clarification in a none covid end of life..

It wasn't within the remit for the staff at the registration office despite us as the family giving more information etc..

Given what your claiming that would suggest an autopsy took place yes?

What actions have you asked about being taken over the two doctors who you claim falsely signed off on a death certificate, which is a potential loss of registration with the GMC..?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

A recent 42 page paper in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research concluded:

"

Ah, an open-source, zero impact-factor "journal" that's not indexed by PubMed? No thanks. Waste of 42 pages of pixels.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"

A recent 42 page paper in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research concluded:

Ah, an open-source, zero impact-factor "journal" that's not indexed by PubMed? No thanks. Waste of 42 pages of pixels. "

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. But no-one with any shred of integrity can argue with the need for correct data collection and analysis.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"

A recent 42 page paper in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research concluded:

Ah, an open-source, zero impact-factor "journal" that's not indexed by PubMed? No thanks. Waste of 42 pages of pixels. "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ethnmelvCouple
over a year ago

Cardiff

OP, the number of deaths in the past 15 months is 20%+ greater than the average for the previous 5 years. No doubt some deaths have been wrongly classified, however we have had 120,000 plus additional deaths over a normal period. My money is on Covid being the cause, but maybe I’m wrong and it is allergy to cheese

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"At the start of the pandemic, we were getting figures of infections and deaths from “Covid-19” and now the figures are quoting “Coronavirus” Most people don’t realise that Coronavirus covers a whole load of viruses, not just Covid-19 but also influenza and many relatively harmless viruses.

They don’t want the figures to be comparable because they want us to be in the dark and rely on the fact that most people don’t question what they are told and don’t really notice when key words are being changed."

Influenza is a Coronavirus?

Really though ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. But no-one with any shred of integrity can argue with the need for correct data collection and analysis. "

Fortunately for us, it won't be the grifters and charlatans at this pseudo journal carrying out the data analysis. Got some data? Submit it to Nature for peer-review.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. But no-one with any shred of integrity can argue with the need for correct data collection and analysis.

Fortunately for us, it won't be the grifters and charlatans at this pseudo journal carrying out the data analysis. Got some data? Submit it to Nature for peer-review. "

Fortunately there are ways to vet the quality of data, it isn't just random dude in white coat against other random dude in white coat

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icplshropsCouple
over a year ago

Rock


"At the start of the pandemic, we were getting figures of infections and deaths from “Covid-19” and now the figures are quoting “Coronavirus” Most people don’t realise that Coronavirus covers a whole load of viruses, not just Covid-19 but also influenza and many relatively harmless viruses.

They don’t want the figures to be comparable because they want us to be in the dark and rely on the fact that most people don’t question what they are told and don’t really notice when key words are being changed.

Influenza is a Coronavirus?

Really though ? "

Influenza is an orthomyxovirus and is a negative sense, single stranded RNA virus, whereas SARS-COV-2 is a member of the coronaviridae family and is a positive sense, ssRNA virus. There you go, really bore people down the pub now!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. But no-one with any shred of integrity can argue with the need for correct data collection and analysis.

Fortunately for us, it won't be the grifters and charlatans at this pseudo journal carrying out the data analysis. Got some data? Submit it to Nature for peer-review. "

You miss the point - which is that governments and authorities need to fund the accurate collection of, and analysis of, more data.

There are still thousands more deaths than ever before with a vaccine roll out, and more potential for unforseen consequences.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"At the start of the pandemic, we were getting figures of infections and deaths from “Covid-19” and now the figures are quoting “Coronavirus” Most people don’t realise that Coronavirus covers a whole load of viruses, not just Covid-19 but also influenza and many relatively harmless viruses.

They don’t want the figures to be comparable because they want us to be in the dark and rely on the fact that most people don’t question what they are told and don’t really notice when key words are being changed.

Influenza is a Coronavirus?

Really though ?

Influenza is an orthomyxovirus and is a negative sense, single stranded RNA virus, whereas SARS-COV-2 is a member of the coronaviridae family and is a positive sense, ssRNA virus. There you go, really bore people down the pub now!"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. But no-one with any shred of integrity can argue with the need for correct data collection and analysis.

Fortunately for us, it won't be the grifters and charlatans at this pseudo journal carrying out the data analysis. Got some data? Submit it to Nature for peer-review.

Fortunately there are ways to vet the quality of data, it isn't just random dude in white coat against other random dude in white coat"

Nor a random sex site member vs a bunch of men in white coats either.

The point is the data is neither being collected nor analysed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"At the start of the pandemic, we were getting figures of infections and deaths from “Covid-19” and now the figures are quoting “Coronavirus” Most people don’t realise that Coronavirus covers a whole load of viruses, not just Covid-19 but also influenza and many relatively harmless viruses.

They don’t want the figures to be comparable because they want us to be in the dark and rely on the fact that most people don’t question what they are told and don’t really notice when key words are being changed.

Influenza is a Coronavirus?

Really though ?

Influenza is an orthomyxovirus and is a negative sense, single stranded RNA virus, whereas SARS-COV-2 is a member of the coronaviridae family and is a positive sense, ssRNA virus. There you go, really bore people down the pub now!"

If that is directed at me the male.

Do i look like a person that frequent pubs

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icplshropsCouple
over a year ago

Rock


"At the start of the pandemic, we were getting figures of infections and deaths from “Covid-19” and now the figures are quoting “Coronavirus” Most people don’t realise that Coronavirus covers a whole load of viruses, not just Covid-19 but also influenza and many relatively harmless viruses.

They don’t want the figures to be comparable because they want us to be in the dark and rely on the fact that most people don’t question what they are told and don’t really notice when key words are being changed.

Influenza is a Coronavirus?

Really though ?

Influenza is an orthomyxovirus and is a negative sense, single stranded RNA virus, whereas SARS-COV-2 is a member of the coronaviridae family and is a positive sense, ssRNA virus. There you go, really bore people down the pub now!

If that is directed at me the male.

Do i look like a person that frequent pubs "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Why would you put down false causes of death? That seems utterly irrational.

This is a great question and one I would love an answer to. I can’t see a reason for artificially increasing the figures but lots of evidence that it’s happening.

I registered a death last year from covid and the registrar wanted me to confirm the cause of death because the registry office were so concerned about the number of deaths they were being told by hospitals were caused by covid that were not they were no longer taking a doctors word for cause of death.

This and the fact counts of Covid have been replaced by counts of Coronavirus and at Christmas time they we’re claiming over 5% (figures as high as 10%) of the population were infected yet the actual numbers didn’t add up to anything near that made it clear to anyone who was prepared to note the figures and tap them into a calculator.

I would dearly love a definitive reason the figures are being manipulated but as far as I can see the most likely reason is that most of the political parties are being funded by pharmaceutical companies.

Another thing I want to know is why hospital patients who had tested negative were being transferred between red and green wards because I can only think of one reason to do that and I really don’t want to believe it is the case.

How would the registration officials know that what was written and signed by two doctors wasn't the cause of death plus the contributing factors?

The registrar at your and my local registration office is not medically qualified..

The next level up in the coroner's office usually is, and as a family we've had an issue where the information on the certificate needed clarification in a none covid end of life..

It wasn't within the remit for the staff at the registration office despite us as the family giving more information etc..

Given what your claiming that would suggest an autopsy took place yes?

What actions have you asked about being taken over the two doctors who you claim falsely signed off on a death certificate, which is a potential loss of registration with the GMC..?"

I agreed with the doctors verdict of covid, the registrar was the one who questioned the doctors not me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Why would you put down false causes of death? That seems utterly irrational.

This is a great question and one I would love an answer to. I can’t see a reason for artificially increasing the figures but lots of evidence that it’s happening.

Have you seen what is happen g in India regarding reporting deaths in general. Truly terrible. 300 die in one province yet the official record is 3. Unbelievable. So under reported. I don't think we will ever know the true number. Just like over here really.

I registered a death last year from covid and the registrar wanted me to confirm the cause of death because the registry office were so concerned about the number of deaths they were being told by hospitals were caused by covid that were not they were no longer taking a doctors word for cause of death.

This and the fact counts of Covid have been replaced by counts of Coronavirus and at Christmas time they we’re claiming over 5% (figures as high as 10%) of the population were infected yet the actual numbers didn’t add up to anything near that made it clear to anyone who was prepared to note the figures and tap them into a calculator.

I would dearly love a definitive reason the figures are being manipulated but as far as I can see the most likely reason is that most of the political parties are being funded by pharmaceutical companies.

Another thing I want to know is why hospital patients who had tested negative were being transferred between red and green wards because I can only think of one reason to do that and I really don’t want to believe it is the case."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Nor a random sex site member vs a bunch of men in white coats either.

The point is the data is neither being collected nor analysed."

Not mutually exclusive.

How do you know? Did you understand that "abstract" you posted or did you just copy pasta it?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alandNitaCouple
over a year ago

Scunthorpe


"At the start of the pandemic, if you had been tested positive for covid and then died of an unrelated cause, being ran over by a bus for instance, it was recorded that you had died with covid.

So by the same token, to be fair and equal, if someone dies having had the vaccine of an unrelated cause, shouldn’t it be recorded as having died having had the vaccine? Otherwise the figures just can’t be compared. "

The concept that lots of people are recorded as casualties of the virus after dying of unrelated cases is just fantasy. The number of additional (above the average) deaths during the pandemic is far in excess of those recorded as "died within 28 days", and the increase closely mirrors the recorded deaths.

Of those who are recorded as covid deaths, in the majority of cases the results of the virus are the "primary" cause.

Cal

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"

Nor a random sex site member vs a bunch of men in white coats either.

The point is the data is neither being collected nor analysed.

Not mutually exclusive.

How do you know? Did you understand that "abstract" you posted or did you just copy pasta it?"

What's not mutually exclusive? You cannot analyse data you do not collect, it requires both.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *I TwoCouple
over a year ago

PDI 12-26th Nov 24

Oh dear ...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. But no-one with any shred of integrity can argue with the need for correct data collection and analysis.

Fortunately for us, it won't be the grifters and charlatans at this pseudo journal carrying out the data analysis. Got some data? Submit it to Nature for peer-review.

Fortunately there are ways to vet the quality of data, it isn't just random dude in white coat against other random dude in white coat

Nor a random sex site member vs a bunch of men in white coats either.

The point is the data is neither being collected nor analysed."

Begs the question if the data is neither being collected nor analysed what is the basis of the claim of thousands of deaths etc?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. But no-one with any shred of integrity can argue with the need for correct data collection and analysis.

Fortunately for us, it won't be the grifters and charlatans at this pseudo journal carrying out the data analysis. Got some data? Submit it to Nature for peer-review.

Fortunately there are ways to vet the quality of data, it isn't just random dude in white coat against other random dude in white coat

Nor a random sex site member vs a bunch of men in white coats meither.

The point is the data is neither being collected nor analysed.

Begs the question if the data is neither being collected nor analysed what is the basis of the claim of thousands of deaths etc?"

Did you not read any of the paper you rubbished? But the number of deaths are a matter of public record on VAERS, MHRA, and European equivalents. Of course only a proportion will be related, but the numbers are way higher than any other vaccine roll out, so they need in-depth analysis.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. But no-one with any shred of integrity can argue with the need for correct data collection and analysis.

Fortunately for us, it won't be the grifters and charlatans at this pseudo journal carrying out the data analysis. Got some data? Submit it to Nature for peer-review.

Fortunately there are ways to vet the quality of data, it isn't just random dude in white coat against other random dude in white coat

Nor a random sex site member vs a bunch of men in white coats either.

The point is the data is neither being collected nor analysed.

Begs the question if the data is neither being collected nor analysed what is the basis of the claim of thousands of deaths etc?"

Did you not read the quote? The paper is calling for more data to be collected for far longer and in more depth.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ethnmelvCouple
over a year ago

Cardiff

The great thing is that vaccinations have led to deaths falling significantly. I’m all for more analysis, but not to bring about paralysis. Vaccinations have worked, they have reduced the risk of death & severe illness. That is a strong positive to many, many people.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"The great thing is that vaccinations have led to deaths falling significantly. I’m all for more analysis, but not to bring about paralysis. Vaccinations have worked, they have reduced the risk of death & severe illness. That is a strong positive to many, many people."

Indeed, for many people the benefits outweigh the risks. For others, there is a need to make a more nuanced assessment, for which more information is required.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. But no-one with any shred of integrity can argue with the need for correct data collection and analysis.

Fortunately for us, it won't be the grifters and charlatans at this pseudo journal carrying out the data analysis. Got some data? Submit it to Nature for peer-review.

Fortunately there are ways to vet the quality of data, it isn't just random dude in white coat against other random dude in white coat

Nor a random sex site member vs a bunch of men in white coats meither.

The point is the data is neither being collected nor analysed.

Begs the question if the data is neither being collected nor analysed what is the basis of the claim of thousands of deaths etc?

Did you not read any of the paper you rubbished? But the number of deaths are a matter of public record on VAERS, MHRA, and European equivalents. Of course only a proportion will be related, but the numbers are way higher than any other vaccine roll out, so they need in-depth analysis."

I didn't rubbish it, I've not commented on it..

Others have and you've yet to provide anything to counter what they've said..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ylonSlutTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham

Which ever way you report covid deaths it will never be perfect, there are several other measures apart from the 28 day headline figure. The 28 day figure of course adds people who die of other things but it also misses out people who die of covid after 28 days. Also there was a massive underestimate of covid deaths at the beginning of the pandemic. The headline figure is probably close to the true figure, maybe an underestimate due to the lack of understanding and testing at the beginning of the pandemic.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. But no-one with any shred of integrity can argue with the need for correct data collection and analysis.

Fortunately for us, it won't be the grifters and charlatans at this pseudo journal carrying out the data analysis. Got some data? Submit it to Nature for peer-review.

Fortunately there are ways to vet the quality of data, it isn't just random dude in white coat against other random dude in white coat

Nor a random sex site member vs a bunch of men in white coats meither.

The point is the data is neither being collected nor analysed.

Begs the question if the data is neither being collected nor analysed what is the basis of the claim of thousands of deaths etc?

Did you not read any of the paper you rubbished? But the number of deaths are a matter of public record on VAERS, MHRA, and European equivalents. Of course only a proportion will be related, but the numbers are way higher than any other vaccine roll out, so they need in-depth analysis.

I didn't rubbish it, I've not commented on it..

Others have and you've yet to provide anything to counter what they've said..

"

I have indeed - more was not necessary, their point was erroneous. The paper was calling for more data collection, and more analysis over a longer period. This is a good thing.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"..

I have indeed - more was not necessary, their point was erroneous. The paper was calling for more data collection, and more analysis over a longer period. This is a good thing. "

You're really standing by that "paper", aren't you? The long list of data they'd like (someone else!) to collect and analyse is slipping into proving a negative. All to sell a few vitamin pills? Grifter gonna grift.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs


"..

I have indeed - more was not necessary, their point was erroneous. The paper was calling for more data collection, and more analysis over a longer period. This is a good thing.

You're really standing by that "paper", aren't you? The long list of data they'd like (someone else!) to collect and analyse is slipping into proving a negative. All to sell a few vitamin pills? Grifter gonna grift. "

Oh don't be silly.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ustforfun49Man
over a year ago

chesterfield

All the truth will come out when the inquiry start's.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"At the start of the pandemic, we were getting figures of infections and deaths from “Covid-19” and now the figures are quoting “Coronavirus” Most people don’t realise that Coronavirus covers a whole load of viruses, not just Covid-19 but also influenza and many relatively harmless viruses.

They don’t want the figures to be comparable because they want us to be in the dark and rely on the fact that most people don’t question what they are told and don’t really notice when key words are being changed.

Influenza is a Coronavirus?

Really though ?

Influenza is an orthomyxovirus and is a negative sense, single stranded RNA virus, whereas SARS-COV-2 is a member of the coronaviridae family and is a positive sense, ssRNA virus. There you go, really bore people down the pub now!"

Sssh, don't add too much factual information into the thread.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top