The Vaccine

Quiner · 22-12-2020 12:13PM

King Mob wrote: »

Still waiting to hear what the accurate death toll for covid is.
Or for a good explanation as to why all of the covid deniers are avoiding the question.

https://www.jems.com/coronavirus/cdc-report-underlying-conditions-94-percent-covid-19-deaths/

6% of the reported covid deaths of covid. 94% related to covid, which could be absolutely anything + a positive covid test, which could be a false positive. It's a farce.

Speaking of farces, Professor Carl Heneghan, who I'm sure will be dismissed as a quack because he goes against the narrative, and Professor Yoon K Loke, another quack no doubt because he dares to question things, wrote about the farce that was the covid death count in England.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/why-no-one-can-ever-recover-from-covid-19-in-england-a-statistical-anomaly/

From the article / paper:

"People living in England have become increasingly concerned in the face of Public Health England’s (PHE) figures demonstrating a relentless daily toll of more than a hundred COVID-associated deaths several days a week (see Figure 1).

This is in stark contrast to the more reassuring recovery in neighbouring regions (Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland), where there are days with no COVID-associated deaths whatsoever.

One reason for this due is a statistical flaw in the way that PHE compiles ‘out of hospital’ deaths data, rather than any genuine difference between the regions of the UK:

“Linking data on confirmed positive cases (identified through testing by NHS and PHE laboratories and commercial partners) to the NHS Demographic Batch Service: when a patient dies, the NHS central register of patients is notified (this is not limited to deaths in hospitals). The list of all lab-confirmed cases is checked against the NHS central register each day, to check if any of the patients have died.”

Here, it seems that PHE regularly looks for people on the NHS database who have ever tested positive, and simply checks to see if they are still alive or not. PHE does not appear to consider how long ago the COVID test result was, nor whether the person has been successfully treated in hospital and discharged to the community. Anyone who has tested COVID positive but subsequently died at a later date of any cause will be included on the PHE COVID death figures.

By this PHE definition, no one with COVID in England is allowed to ever recover from their illness. A patient who has tested positive, but successfully treated and discharged from hospital, will still be counted as a COVID death even if they had a heart attack or were run over by a bus three months later."

How on earth can people continue to claim that 1.5/6 million people have died of covid in the light of the 6% figure in the US and the death count farce in England?

That paper forced the ghastly Hancock to order an urgent review into the way deaths are recorded in England: https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/17/matt-hancock-calls-urgent-inquiry-phe-covid-19-death-figures

The result? People who died within 28 days of a positive covid test are recorded as 'died of covid'. So it's still a farce.

So the covid death number is far far lower than 1.5 million.

Quiner · 22-12-2020 12:16PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Treatments have drastically improved in the past year. Drugs are recommended based on trials and suitability for the stage of the illness.

There's no single form of cancer btw so simply curing multiple forms in a year is a tad unrealistic. Preventing getting cancers is pretty much the dream rather than simply curing them. Eg the hpv vaccine eliminates the most deadly forms of cervical cancers. That's also been subject to plenty of conspiracies.

A vaccine did not become a focal point because of profits btw. In fact, treatments would be far more profitable. Keeping a highly contagious virus around indefinitely and getting the profits from drugs used. But the strain on health services would be mental.

I like your attitude though. We should have kept around smallpox,polio and measles.(Although that's back sadly due to idiots not vaccinating.)

Unless the drug is hydroxychloroquine: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/study-finds-84-fewer-hospitalizations-for-patients-treated-with-controversial-drug-hydroxychloroquine?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true

aido79 · 22-12-2020 12:16PM

mulbot wrote: »

In fairness,not "all"the experts agree with the common narrative

That's true but as with everything medical there will always be people who disagree with the general consensus and are usually proven wrong.

Can you show me an expert who has proven something that validates a conspiracy theory around covid19? Just to clarify I'm asking for actual proof not a claim or opinion.

aido79 · 22-12-2020 12:21PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

The entire pharmaceutical industry focused on a vaccine as there's no money in a cure. Why haven't they pulled together to find a cure for cancer or even Covid, these vaccines are far from a solution.
Why do we hear so little about treatments or cures when there's good evidence that existing drugs can annihilate Covid and stop it's spread.
It's vaccine, vaccine, vaccine non stop.

Have you ever heard the expression "prevention is better than cure"?
Do you honestly believe that no one is working on a cure for cancer and there isn't massive money to be made from curing cancer?

What drugs can stop the spread of covid?

22-12-2020 12:22PM

Quiner wrote: »

Unless the drug is hydroxychloroquine: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/study-finds-84-fewer-hospitalizations-for-patients-treated-with-controversial-drug-hydroxychloroquine?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true

And I can find you a dozen other papers that dispute this. The recommendations to not use it are based on the research. A placebo effect appears to the general view of research.

Quiner · 22-12-2020 12:29PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And I can find you a dozen other papers that dispute this. The recommendations to not use it are based on the research. A placebo effect appears to the general view of research.

Professor Harvey Risch of Yale says it's the key to defeating covid:

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535%3famp=1

"Why has hydroxychloroquine been disregarded?

First, as all know, the medication has become highly politicized. For many, it is viewed as a marker of political identity, on both sides of the political spectrum. Nobody needs me to remind them that this is not how medicine should proceed. We must judge this medication strictly on the science. When doctors graduate from medical school, they formally promise to make the health and life of the patient their first consideration, without biases of race, religion, nationality, social standing—or political affiliation. Lives must come first.

Second, the drug has not been used properly in many studies. Hydroxychloroquine has shown major success when used early in high-risk people but, as one would expect for an antiviral, much less success when used late in the disease course. Even so, it has demonstrated significant benefit in large hospital studies in Michigan and New York City when started within the first 24 to 48 hours after admission.

In fact, as inexpensive, oral and widely available medications, and a nutritional supplement, the combination of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin or doxycycline, and zinc are well-suited for early treatment in the outpatient setting. The combination should be prescribed in high-risk patients immediately upon clinical suspicion of COVID-19 disease, without waiting for results of testing. Delays in waiting before starting the medications can reduce their efficacy.

Third, concerns have been raised by the FDA and others about risks of cardiac arrhythmia, especially when hydroxychloroquine is given in combination with azithromycin. The FDA based its comments on data in its FDA Adverse Event Reporting System. This reporting system captured up to a thousand cases of arrhythmias attributed to hydroxychloroquine use. In fact, the number is likely higher than that, since the reporting system, which requires physicians or patients to initiate contact with the FDA, appreciably undercounts drug side effects.

But what the FDA did not announce is that these adverse events were generated from tens of millions of patient uses of hydroxychloroquine for long periods of time, often for the chronic treatment of lupus or rheumatoid arthritis. Even if the true rates of arrhythmia are ten-fold higher than those reported, the harms would be minuscule compared to the mortality occurring right now in inadequately treated high-risk COVID-19 patients. This fact is proven by an Oxford University study of more than 320,000 older patients taking both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, who had arrhythmia excess death rates of less than 9/100,000 users, as I discuss in my May 27 paper cited above. A new paper in the American Journal of Medicine by established cardiologists around the world fully agrees with this."

22-12-2020 12:34PM

And thankfully we don't base prescribing medications on the view of one researcher. We use the body of research. The body of it doesn't support his view. Tad telling that Trump wasn't on it...

robinph · 22-12-2020 12:48PM

Quiner wrote: »

https://www.jems.com/coronavirus/cdc-report-underlying-conditions-94-percent-covid-19-deaths/

6% of the reported covid deaths of covid. 94% related to covid, which could be absolutely anything + a positive covid test, which could be a false positive. It's a farce.

Speaking of farces, Professor Carl Heneghan, who I'm sure will be dismissed as a quack because he goes against the narrative, and Professor Yoon K Loke, another quack no doubt because he dares to question things, wrote about the farce that was the covid death count in England.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/why-no-one-can-ever-recover-from-covid-19-in-england-a-statistical-anomaly/

From the article / paper:

"People living in England have become increasingly concerned in the face of Public Health England’s (PHE) figures demonstrating a relentless daily toll of more than a hundred COVID-associated deaths several days a week (see Figure 1).

This is in stark contrast to the more reassuring recovery in neighbouring regions (Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland), where there are days with no COVID-associated deaths whatsoever.

One reason for this due is a statistical flaw in the way that PHE compiles ‘out of hospital’ deaths data, rather than any genuine difference between the regions of the UK:

“Linking data on confirmed positive cases (identified through testing by NHS and PHE laboratories and commercial partners) to the NHS Demographic Batch Service: when a patient dies, the NHS central register of patients is notified (this is not limited to deaths in hospitals). The list of all lab-confirmed cases is checked against the NHS central register each day, to check if any of the patients have died.”

Here, it seems that PHE regularly looks for people on the NHS database who have ever tested positive, and simply checks to see if they are still alive or not. PHE does not appear to consider how long ago the COVID test result was, nor whether the person has been successfully treated in hospital and discharged to the community. Anyone who has tested COVID positive but subsequently died at a later date of any cause will be included on the PHE COVID death figures.

By this PHE definition, no one with COVID in England is allowed to ever recover from their illness. A patient who has tested positive, but successfully treated and discharged from hospital, will still be counted as a COVID death even if they had a heart attack or were run over by a bus three months later."

How on earth can people continue to claim that 1.5/6 million people have died of covid in the light of the 6% figure in the US and the death count farce in England?

That paper forced the ghastly Hancock to order an urgent review into the way deaths are recorded in England: https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/17/matt-hancock-calls-urgent-inquiry-phe-covid-19-death-figures

The result? People who died within 28 days of a positive covid test are recorded as 'died of covid'. So it's still a farce.

So the covid death number is far far lower than 1.5 million.

I belive they started off with under reporting and only adding the death to the numbers if someone was dressed as a Covid19 particle fancy dress outfit at the time of their death. They then were able to actually test people, sometimes, so counted anyone who had ever had a positive test. They then realised this was then over counting and sometime in the summer scrubbed 20k deaths off the count and were only including them if there was a positive test within 28 days and they also had mention of covid19 on the death certificate.

It's known that its not correct, but until some very bored researchers trawl through the data in 10 years time and figure out more accurate numbers that's what we have to work with. Doesn't really matter though at this point, just that it's a big number. The numbers that matter are the ones about how many people are being treated in hospital and if they have enough spare beds available for when you impale yourself on the door next time you try to open it.

At the moment in some areas that is touch and go if they would have space for you in a months time due to the numbers of other people who they are treating with covid.

Quiner · 22-12-2020 12:56PM

robinph wrote: »

I belive they started off with under reporting and only adding the death to the numbers if someone was dressed as a Covid19 particle fancy dress outfit at the time of their death. They then were able to actually test people, sometimes, so counted anyone who had ever had a positive test. They then realised this was then over counting and sometime in the summer scrubbed 20k deaths off the count and were only including them if there was a positive test within 28 days and they also had mention of covid19 on the death certificate.

It's known that its not correct, but until some very bored researchers trawl through the data in 10 years time and figure out more accurate numbers that's what we have to work with. Doesn't really matter though at this point, just that it's a big number. The numbers that matter are the ones about how many people are being treated in hospital and if they have enough spare beds available for when you impale yourself on the door next time you try to open it.

At the moment in some areas that is touch and go if they would have space for you in a months time due to the numbers of other people who they are treating with covid.

The opening few sentences of your post shows how much of a farce it is.

I agree that it doesn't really matter, but I just wanted to show that the 1.5 million number is ridiculous. And yet we still hear 'covid has killed 1.5 million people'. Every day. Has it even killed, directly, more than a few hundred thousand? 6% in the US. The England farce. God knows what other farces are going on in other countries.

robinph · 22-12-2020 01:02PM

Quiner wrote: »

The opening few sentences of your post shows how much of a farce it is.

I agree that it doesn't really matter, but I just wanted to show that the 1.5 million number is ridiculous. And yet we still hear 'covid has killed 1.5 million people'. Every day. Has it even killed, directly, more than a few hundred thousand? 6% in the US. The England farce. God knows what other farces are going on in other countries.

The numbers listed for the UK based on wording of death certificates matches up with the excess deaths numbers based on the 5 year averages. If those people haven't been dying from Covid19 then what have they been dying from?

There wasn't an excess number of major car crashes in April, or a mass poisoning, or an earthquake, or a mass suicide. How is the number ridiculous? People are dead, there is a virus going around causing large numbers of people to go to hospital. Where is the problem with the numbers?

22-12-2020 01:02PM

Quiner wrote: »

https://www.jems.com/coronavirus/cdc-report-underlying-conditions-94-percent-covid-19-deaths/

6% of the reported covid deaths of covid. 94% related to covid, which could be absolutely anything + a positive covid test, which could be a false positive. It's a farce.

But that's not what report says.
You are misrepresenting it as per usual.

Of those 94 percent, what percentage had conditions that were terminal?
How many had conditions that could be fatal on their own?
What percentage had a underlying condition that did contribute to their death?
What percentage had another condition that was caused or exasperated by their covid infection?

Were in the report does it directly state that covid played no role in their deaths.

Claiming that this report states that covid did not contribute to 94% of these deaths simply because the person also had some other condition, is dishonest in the extreme.

Then we come to the other issue that conspiracy theorists often ignore because they don't think very deeply about their claims.
Why would the CDC make and release this report if it exposes their plot to inflate the figures.
It makes no logical sense for them to do this.
If they were part of a plot of inflate the numbers, this report wouldn't exist and it wouldn't contradict their other claims.

Quiner wrote: »

So the covid death number is far far lower than 1.5 million.

You're still not giving a number.
Why not?

skooterblue2 · 22-12-2020 01:20PM

aido79 wrote: »

Have you ever heard the expression "prevention is better than cure"?
Do you honestly believe that no one is working on a cure for cancer and there isn't massive money to be made from curing cancer?

There is more money to be made out of cancer than finding a cure.
Massive money in chemotherapy.!!!!
Massive money in painkilers (see Sackler family).
Massive money in cutting pensions short.
Massive money in taxation with wills.
No 1 cause of bankruptcy is medical bills.
Many cures for cancer have be snubbed out by big Pharma.
The state doesnt want you living past 55 years.

Fighting Tao · 22-12-2020 01:23PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

There is more money to be made out of cancer than finding a cure.
Massive money in chemotherapy.!!!!
Massive money in painkilers (see Sackler family).
Massive money in cutting pensions short.
Massive money in taxation with wills.
No 1 cause of bankruptcy is medical bills.
Many cures for cancer have be snubbed out by big Pharma.
The state doesnt want you living past 55 years.

So the politicians running the state as voted by the people don’t want to live past 55 either?

aido79 · 22-12-2020 01:25PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

There is more money to be made out of cancer than finding a cure.
Massive money in chemotherapy.!!!!
Massive money in painkilers (see Sackler family).
Massive money in cutting pensions short.
Massive money in taxation with wills.
No 1 cause of bankruptcy is medical bills.
Many cures for cancer have be snubbed out by big Pharma.
The state doesnt want you living past 55 years.

How would a cure for cancer even work? What cures have been snubbed out by big pharma?
Wouldn't we be back to debating why everyone should take it?
Is there a conspiracy theory around cancer now?

Fighting Tao · 22-12-2020 01:26PM

aido79 wrote: »

How would a cure for cancer even work? What cures have been snubbed out by big pharma?
Wouldn't we be back to debating why everyone should take it?
Is there a conspiracy theory around cancer now?

‘Big pharma’ says it all. I’m sure that people who use that phrase reject all medical intervention, even as far as an aspirin or paracetamol.

aido79 · 22-12-2020 01:30PM

Fighting Tao wrote: »

‘Big pharma’ says it all. I’m sure that people who use that phrase reject all medical intervention, even as far as an aspirin or paracetamol.

Life expectancy is at an all time high because of "Big Pharma" and yet they don't want us to live past 55. Makes perfect sense. Some of these really do pick and choose what they want to believe very badly.

Timberrrrrrrr · 22-12-2020 01:33PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

There is more money to be made out of cancer than finding a cure.
Massive money in chemotherapy.!!!!
Massive money in painkilers (see Sackler family).
Massive money in cutting pensions short.
Massive money in taxation with wills.
No 1 cause of bankruptcy IN AMERICA is medical bills.
Many cures for cancer have be snubbed out by big Pharma.
The state doesnt want you living past 55 years.

Fixed that for you.

Also, seeing as pension age is over 65 why would they want you dead 10 years early?

skooterblue2 · 22-12-2020 01:34PM

Fighting Tao wrote: »

‘Big pharma’ says it all. I’m sure that people who use that phrase reject all medical intervention, even as far as an aspirin or paracetamol.

Yup the last day I was at the GP for getting me a form filled out, he was coaxing me to get the flu vaccine for sarcoidosis. I always wonder why his waiting room is empty.

I go in, spend 5 minutes talking about paperwork and 20 minutes talking about shares and still the waiting room is empty on my way out!!!

Until you have been screwed over by the HSE or a doctor its very easy to take every pill going.

skooterblue2 · 22-12-2020 01:37PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Fixed that for you.

Also, seeing as pension age is over 65 why would they want you dead 10 years early?

That is when most people need a little extra medica maintenance. Why take the risk and get rid of people early? In fact they want to do away with pensions altogether. They want to raise the age for the state pension and it is not increasing with inflation.

22-12-2020 01:43PM

aido79 wrote: »

How would a cure for cancer even work? What cures have been snubbed out by big pharma?
Wouldn't we be back to debating why everyone should take it?
Is there a conspiracy theory around cancer now?

No doubt we're about to get a youtube video for some snakeoil salesman claiming that he has the one true cure for cancer and Big Pharma is after him.

Timberrrrrrrr · 22-12-2020 01:48PM

skooterblue2 wrote: »

That is when most people need a little extra medica maintenance. Why take the risk and get rid of people early? In fact they want to do away with pensions altogether. They want to raise the age for the state pension and it is not increasing with inflation.

Ah I just realised, your the chap who claimed Korea culled pigs using a death Ray:pac:

Yeah you can't be taken seriously after that idiotic claim.

Quiner · 22-12-2020 01:53PM

robinph wrote: »

The numbers listed for the UK based on wording of death certificates matches up with the excess deaths numbers based on the 5 year averages. If those people haven't been dying from Covid19 then what have they been dying from?

There wasn't an excess number of major car crashes in April, or a mass poisoning, or an earthquake, or a mass suicide. How is the number ridiculous? People are dead, there is a virus going around causing large numbers of people to go to hospital. Where is the problem with the numbers?

Could they have died as a result of the lockdown?

And are there any excess deaths in the UK? I keep reading about 70,000 excess deaths, but then I read that there have been no excess deaths. Can't both be true.

https://twitter.com/PeakePolly/status/1340231291569135617

Okay, it's a tweet. Not the best source, but the person claims the figures are from ons.gov.uk. 453,700 deaths so far in the UK, apparently. Lower than 2017, 2018, and 2019.

robinph, I'm not saying you're lying about the excess deaths. I'm just wondering how both statements, i.e. '70,000 excess deaths' and '0 excess deaths', can both be made.

Quiner · 22-12-2020 01:55PM

King Mob wrote: »

But that's not what report says.
You are misrepresenting it as per usual.

Of those 94 percent, what percentage had conditions that were terminal?
How many had conditions that could be fatal on their own?
What percentage had a underlying condition that did contribute to their death?
What percentage had another condition that was caused or exasperated by their covid infection?

Were in the report does it directly state that covid played no role in their deaths.

Claiming that this report states that covid did not contribute to 94% of these deaths simply because the person also had some other condition, is dishonest in the extreme.

Then we come to the other issue that conspiracy theorists often ignore because they don't think very deeply about their claims.
Why would the CDC make and release this report if it exposes their plot to inflate the figures.
It makes no logical sense for them to do this.
If they were part of a plot of inflate the numbers, this report wouldn't exist and it wouldn't contradict their other claims.

You're still not giving a number.
Why not?

The question was about 'direct from covid'. It's 6% of whatever number they claim has 'died of covid'.

I never said it didn't contribute to the 94% of people who died. I'm saying that 6% died directly of covid.

22-12-2020 01:55PM

Quiner wrote: »

Okay, it's a tweet. Not the best source,

No. Twitter in not a source.
Reading and copy pasting twitter is not research.

Quiner · 22-12-2020 01:58PM

King Mob wrote: »

No. Twitter in not a source.
Reading and copy pasting twitter is not research.

Is the figure of 453,700 at the time of the tweet, i.e. no excess deaths compared with 2017, 2018 and 2019, accurate?

It doesn't matter that it's Twitter. It's the image in the tweet and the figure that matters. I'm not saying the excess number of 70,000 isn't accurate. I', wondering myself which is true. 70,000 excess deaths, or 0 excess deaths. Both claims are being made. They can't both be true.

22-12-2020 02:00PM

Quiner wrote: »

Is the figure of 453,700 at the time of the tweet, i.e. no excess deaths compared with 2017, 2018 and 2019, accurate?

How about instead of wasting time reading randos on twitter, you provide the real numbers for covid deaths.
You've been still running away from this point.

And no, it's probably not. Or is dishonestly presented or it's twisted in some way.
People on twitter do this to trick gullible people in believing their false claims.

Quiner · 22-12-2020 02:01PM

King Mob wrote: »

How about instead of wasting time reading randos on twitter, you provide the real numbers for covid deaths.
You've been still running away from this point.

I did. 6% of whatever the number they're claiming died of covid in the US. I'm not going to answer the question over and over again.

Could someone address the issue of 70,000 excess deaths vs 0 excess deaths? Both claims are being made.

aido79 · 22-12-2020 02:03PM

Quiner wrote: »

Is the figure of 453,700 at the time of the tweet, i.e. no excess deaths compared with 2017, 2018 and 2019, accurate?

It doesn't matter that it's Twitter. It's the image in the tweet and the figure that matters. I'm not saying the excess number of 70,000 isn't accurate. I', wondering myself which is true. 70,000 excess deaths, or 0 excess deaths. Both claims are being made. They can't both be true.

Do you think if the world carried on as normal and we just lived with covid19 with no changes to the way we live the death toll would be any different to other years?

Quiner · 22-12-2020 02:11PM

aido79 wrote: »

Do you think if the world carried on as normal and we just lived with covid19 with no changes to the way we live the death toll would be any different to other years?

Essentially yes. But that's not to say that a few simple measures such as distancing and shielding the elderly wouldn't have been required. But masks have to be useless. Every country in the world with 24/7 mask wearing has huge case numbers and deaths. They're being used to control people.

This has been a casedemic since April or May. That's why WHO changed the definition of a pandemic back in 2009. And they're after changing the definition of herd immunity as well. People point to the US, but the US is a very unhealthy country. It was also going to have a lot of deaths. But, again, it has been claimed that the deaths in the US for this year are on course to be lower than previous years. And it's also being claimed that there have been over 300,000 excess deaths. Which is true?

Ash.J.Williams · 22-12-2020 02:16PM

Quiner wrote: »

Essentially yes. But that's not to say that a few simple measures such as distancing and shielding the elderly wouldn't have been required. But masks have to be useless. Every country in the world with 24/7 mask wearing has huge case numbers and deaths. They're being used to control people.

This has been a casedemic since April or May. That's why WHO changed the definition of a pandemic back in 2009. And they're after changing the definition of herd immunity as well. People point to the US, but the US is a very unhealthy country. It was also going to have a lot of deaths. But, again, it has been claimed that the deaths in the US for this year are on course to be lower than previous years. And it's also being claimed that there have been over 300,000 excess deaths. Which is true?

can you explain how it controls people?

The Vaccine

Comments