Relaxation of Restrictions, Part X *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

arccosh wrote: »

SACRIFICE THE SICK AND THE WEAK

Well...we do every year....

arccosh wrote: »

really? never been to a sacrifice, what belief system does this?

Well we don't remove virtually all our civil liberties and shut down a huge part of our economy in an attempt to save them...

arccosh wrote: »

where've you been the last year?

I can give you a massive list of where I haven't been?

arccosh wrote: »

g'wan then

https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/066ce-ireland-placed-on-full-level-5-restrictions-of-the-plan-for-living-with-covid-19/

darconio wrote: »

That's relatively old, it's a study published in July 2020, but regardless, do we want to keep ignoring the following sentence or do we want to acknowledge the fact that the number of reported deaths by covid is not real?

"As of mid April, in line with World Health Organization (WHO) guidance, death reporting was extended to include deaths both in patients with probable COVID-19 in addition to deaths among confirmed cases.
By definition, such deaths must result 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 (for example, trauma)."

The above are WHO guidelines used by HIQA for its study of RIP death notices are out of date by about a year.

See the ECDC covid guidelines linked to on the HPSC website I detailed and explanation.

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/surveillance/epidemiologyfrequentlyaskedquestions/

The definitions used are explained here and include Confirmed case, Probable case, Possible case etc

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/casedefinitions/covid-19interimcasedefinitionforireland/


Under the ECDC guidelines- It remains what is detailed are laboratory confirmed (tested positive) deaths and non laboratory confirmed deaths as alternatively determined by doctors etc and relevant criteria for each category.

Deleted User wrote: »

This is what happens when you “see a guy talking” rather than listen to reality. The number of deaths does not and never has defined a pandemic

Deleted User wrote: »

A pandemic is a pandemic. Whether it’s haemorrhaging fever with ifr of 99% or a mild rash. The reaction is based on the potential impact to life and health not because it’s declared a pandemic.

You're the gift that keeps on giving...never change Raind....never change!

Deleted User wrote: »

Reading comprehension as always is a challenge I see

No I got you...

A Pandemic is not concerned with death rates, it's the rate of impact on life...death would be a fairly significant impact on life one would have thought!!!

Deleted User wrote: »

I shall try a be a bit slower

A declaration pandemic is based on the spread of an infectious agent and not on its severity

The reaction to an infectious agent is based on its severity and not on the fact that it’s been declared a pandemic. An Ebola outbreak in west Africa for example requires extreme reactions but it’s not a pandemic

Two separate things. Do you need smaller words?

Jesus Raind...you're not the quickest as it is....

I understand the point you are making...I also understand my own ignorance of the term....I was merely pointing out that it had been alleged the WHO changed the definition of the term.

I understand there are a few elements as in the geographical spread, the death rate would be one you'd imagine would indicate the severity of it, would we have locked down our country if we know this pandemic had a death rate of about 0.3 - 0.5%....I am not sure the vast public would have signed up to that!

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

The definition of pandemic is actually based on the ability of a disease to spread throughout the world.

From wikipedia
"A pandemic (from Greek πᾶν, pan, "all" and δῆμος, demos, "local people" the 'crowd')
is an epidemic of an infectious disease that has spread across a large region,
for instance multiple continents or worldwide,
affecting a substantial number of people. "

normanoffside wrote: »

https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1384185685226057743

You can watch it yourself here from 33-36 minutes

'We've been very clear since day 1 that we've reported all deaths because of or with Covid 19"

Later When asked about people with terminal illness and a short potential life span who just happened to die with covid he says they do make up a proportion of our (covid) deaths.

hahaha hahaha.

That is not even within in an asses roar of what you claimed. :pac:

Viz.

normanoffside wrote: »

Hi Gozunda, Dr Glynn was just asked about this and has confirmed that he reports all deaths with Covid19 whether or not it is the cause of or even a factor in the death.

So he says they report all covid related deaths - - that does not mean that they assign covid as a cause of death to anything and everything as you have suggested above

Oh and of the covid deaths reported - a proportion have underlying conditions. Well there's a surprise. I didn't know that...

Silentcorner wrote: »

Jesus Raind...you're not the quickest as it is....

I understand the point you are making...I also understand my own ignorance of the term....I was merely pointing out that it had been alleged the WHO changed the definition of the term.

I understand there are a few elements as in the geographical spread, the death rate would be one you'd imagine would indicate the severity of it, would we have locked down our country if we know this pandemic had a death rate of about 0.3 - 0.5%....I am not sure the vast public would have signed up to that!

We know that presently the CFR is 2.14% not 0,3 -0.5% and that is for all age groups. Stands to reason that the percentage for the elderly and those with underlying condition will be higher again.

charlie14 wrote: »

From that I take it you have an explanation for all the high E.U. excess monthly deaths that coincide with the various Covid waves.
If those excess deaths are not due to Covid, then what are they due too ?

The explanation is simple, but there are no official figures supporting the fact.

Right at the start, it was obvious that the lockdowns and closures of hospital departments would kill far more people than the over-promoted virus. And that is exactly what has happened.

Hospital departments were shut and hospital staff with not enough to do performed funny dances which were put onto the internet to entertain the patients who were being denied medical treatment. Politicians claimed that hospitals were under huge pressure, but the figures showed that wards and intensive care units were emptier than usual.

So called cure (the lockdown policies and the refusal to treat other patients to "protect" them from infection) kills far more people than the disease. But no, you will not find it in official figures. Because who is going to admit and explain this? Corrupted politicians or lying doctors?