CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 5)

[the-photographer]

andy43 said:

the-photographer said:

Pupbelly said:

So lots of media about Vitamin D today stating that 80% of the people that died had a vitamin D deficiency. I guess that's due to the majority of the people dieing are old and therefore don't get outside too much and that the older generation don't take in sufficient vitamin D generally?

That's great news when most folk are now spending even more time inside!

We've tried a bit in the past, not as much promotion as some countries

https://life.spectator.co.uk/articles/on-vitamin-d...

Crazy this is only making news now.
Spanish study was pointing to this over a month ago.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V8Ks9fUh2k8
Older studies for resp problems clearly point to the same conclusions.
Anthony Faucii admitted he’s on 6000IU a day plus vit C.
Cheap, simple, widely available... but unprofitable.

Loads and loads of research from 10/20/30 years ago

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228698999...

[the-photographer]

Latest government thinking to brighten your day

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/27/second...

[Biker 1]

andy43 said:

Crazy this is only making news now.
Spanish study was pointing to this over a month ago.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V8Ks9fUh2k8 skip to 14.50 for the results
Older studies for resp problems clearly point to the same conclusions.
Anthony Faucii admitted he’s on 6000IU a day plus vit C.
Cheap, simple, widely available... but unprofitable.

Edited by andy43 on Wednesday 28th October 10:33

I've been taking vitamin D pills for 5 years, so hopefully won't die of bat-flu. £4 at Sainsbury's for 90 Vitabiotics tablets - so about £1/month = less than £1 billion pa (at retail price) to dish out to every UK citizen. Seems better value & possibly more effective than £12 billion for the farcical track & trace....

[TheDrBrian]

the-photographer said:

Pupbelly said:

So lots of media about Vitamin D today stating that 80% of the people that died had a vitamin D deficiency. I guess that's due to the majority of the people dieing are old and therefore don't get outside too much and that the older generation don't take in sufficient vitamin D generally?

That's great news when most folk are now spending even more time inside!

We've tried a bit in the past, not as much promotion as some countries

https://life.spectator.co.uk/articles/on-vitamin-d...

Interesting that ofcom specifically highlight vitamin D as a quack cure and therefore not reportable in the CCC.... UNITED KINGDOM.

MikeT66 said:

The hospitals are nearly always full at this time of the year. It is a provision and service to be used. If the hospitals ran constantly at 50% capacity, what do you think would happen? I'll give you a clue - those services would be cut to the required level. So 'yes' - we do sometimes want and indeed need them to be full.

The link you didn’t read was about the holy nhs causing an outbreak in its hospital that has killed 40 grannies.

[isaldiri]

Elysium said:

pneumothorax said:

Elysium said:

This is the work they did:

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/death-certificate-da...

Lord Sumptions talk is eye opening. I have felt this was wrong from the beginning, but lacked sufficient understanding of our constitution and democratic conventions to really see how extreme it has been.

Two hundred years of democracy has been overridden. That’s why we have never experienced this before. It is unlike anything that has ever happened before.

Section C in my experience was rarely needed. It was often a loosely (but likely contributory) background condition, like heart disease.

As for Lord Sumption, there must be people of similar intellect advising HMG directly, surely.

What CEBM are saying is that COVID did not appear in section A, B or C for 30% of COVID deaths. It was noted in the section below as a condition that contributed to the death, but did not cause it.

Ok to clear this up I have used the exact cebm methodology for the last 4 weeks from 9 Oct per last available PHE excess mortality report.

Covid as underlying cause vs mentions was at 85%, 85%, 83% and 80% for those 4 weeks.

I think given that it is bloody unlikely covid is incidental in 80% of reported covid mentioned deaths as was being suggested.

[pneumothorax]

isaldiri said:

Ok to clear this up I have used the exact cebm methodology for the last 4 weeks from 9 Oct per last available PHE excess mortality report.

Covid as underlying cause vs mentions was at 85%, 85%, 83% and 80% for those 4 weeks.

I think given that it is bloody unlikely covid is incidental in 80% of reported covid mentioned deaths as was being suggested.

Sure

But if Elysium is right and that in 1/3 of cases CV19 was mentioned far down the death certificate I do think it's relevant. I have written them, I understand the thought process.

Particularly if it is not in the first three lines, it's not the actual reason (as certified) that someone has died, and it's certainly not, legally, the reason they succumbed (previously)

[Sophisticated Sarah]

Blue One said:

Just (maybe for my own sanity) voicing concerns that have already been flagged on here based on news headlines this week:

We are never told:

- How many people died of Covid as opposed to 'with Covid'
- How many of these people had severe underlying health conditions
- How many people died that same week from the flu, cancer etc (remember 10, 000 people a week die in the UK)

This predilection in the media to carve out the Covid-only death numbers, and to provide no context for these is immensely irresponsible and misleading. To anyone with an educated view of the world, there is no doubt a Brexit-type 'Project Fear' is being effectively and well-coordinated across all major broadcast outlets, perpetuating slick messaging and daily articles/news on the deadly, terrible 'killer disease' we are all facing.

Why this is happening, I don't know, I don't think it is a conspiracy except that a certain group (politicians, scientists and media) have joined forces and create an agreed narrative on Covid that they roll-out to a gullible public to enforce an agenda of lockdown and fear. I suspect the reasons for this are well intentioned, but it's inability to look at other options, viewpoints or data is immensely damaging and stupid. It is about time Imperial College and associated acolytes on SAGE were shoved aside and fresh voices from Oxford etc were also given prominence in the official narrative.

How much longer will this stupidity be allowed to continue?

Isn’t it against OFCOM regulations to question it? Sure I saw something the other day that there are guidelines against questioning the numbers / severity of Covid

[Elysium]

isaldiri said:

Elysium said:

pneumothorax said:

Elysium said:

This is the work they did:

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/death-certificate-da...

Lord Sumptions talk is eye opening. I have felt this was wrong from the beginning, but lacked sufficient understanding of our constitution and democratic conventions to really see how extreme it has been.

Two hundred years of democracy has been overridden. That’s why we have never experienced this before. It is unlike anything that has ever happened before.

Section C in my experience was rarely needed. It was often a loosely (but likely contributory) background condition, like heart disease.

As for Lord Sumption, there must be people of similar intellect advising HMG directly, surely.

What CEBM are saying is that COVID did not appear in section A, B or C for 30% of COVID deaths. It was noted in the section below as a condition that contributed to the death, but did not cause it.

Ok to clear this up I have used the exact cebm methodology for the last 4 weeks from 9 Oct per last available PHE excess mortality report.

Covid as underlying cause vs mentions was at 85%, 85%, 83% and 80% for those 4 weeks.

I think given that it is bloody unlikely covid is incidental in 80% of reported covid mentioned deaths as was being suggested.

Good idea. I will have to do the same myself when I get the opportunity.

So we know that the 20% of the COVID deaths in the final week were not caused directly by COVID.

That is significant.

What we don’t know is how the causes of death interact. If COVID is stated alongside any other disease it trumps it.

So how many are COVID plus a respiratory condition that would normally lead to death at this time of year?

How many are COVID plus an unconnected complaint?

Your certainty in dismissing this as ‘bloody unlikely’ is not logical.

If 80% plus of people outside of hospital have COVID without symptoms then it’s plausible that a sizeable amount in hospital also have asymptomatic COVID.

How does a doctor decide if a sick person with leukaemia and COVID had their death accelerated by COVID. It’s not black and white however much you want it to be.

All we know is that if COVID is listed it always wins.

[Stay in Bed Instead]

Have sage moved from Everest to Table Mountain?

[ant1973]

Stay in Bed Instead said:

Have sage moved from Everest to Table Mountain?

They've certainly flattened the curve...

[TheDrBrian]

Lockdown harder like Argentina

Archive in case it doesn’t work.

[toastyhamster]

Well that's all of Nottinghamshire in tier 3 from 00:01 on Friday, so sayeth our local councillor.

[Stay in Bed Instead]

It's clearly moving south.

[isaldiri]

Elysium said:

So we know that the 20% of the COVID deaths in the final week were not caused directly by COVID.

No it's the other way round. 20% was the furthest one and that has decreased to 15% for the most recently available one.

In any case contrary to your suggestion it's not 30% or greater of covid memtions not being underlying cause of death but actually a number that has fallen from mid summer. Now you're suggesting even if underlying cause of death has covid it is still incidental?

[johnboy1975]

MikeT66 said:

fastraxx said:

MikeT66 said:

Outstanding discussion. I wish he was the figurehead for the anti-lockdown movement (rather than the likes of Piers Corbyn, Icke, etc).

He’s one of the very few I’ve heard making much sense throughout this whole shambles

Agreed. Why he doesn't get more 'media time' is a bit disconcerting. His is the most reasoned, balanced and educated voice against the government measures I've heard; and certainly someone that people could rally behind.

JagLover said:

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Well that is your choice and all the millions who do love Christmas should have the choice to celebrate it if they wish.

Personally it is one of my favourite days of the year. Driving back to London with all the Christmas songs playing. I like giving presents to all the family, particularly my little nieces, and then having some champagne and later Christmas dinner.

The government will lose even more popularity if they try and stand in the way of Christmas.

I wonder if the government are facing a dilemma with Christmas. If they let the restrictions loose for the holiday period (bearing in mind they had a clampdown just before Eid) I wonder how easy they think it would be to get people back into their 'boxes' once they have sampled freedom (for that is what it would feel like) again.

If the Christian (and let's face it, the non religious who enjoy a good piss up) population got a break in lockdown for Xmas, do you think muslims would be entitled to feel agreived they didn't get one for Eid?

All in this together, and all that?

Nice song about Xmas by Tim Minchin. Sums it up for me. (White wine in the sun)

https://youtu.be/fCNvZqpa-7Q

[gazapc]

johnboy1975 said:

If the Christian (and let's face it, the non religious who enjoy a good piss up) population got a break in lockdown for Xmas, do you think muslims would be entitled to feel agreived they didn't get one for Eid?

All in this together, and all that?

Easter is the most significant Christian festival, not Christmas, and that was in the full lockdown.


In anycase I don't think we should be making exceptions just for Christmas, we should be rolling back restrictions across the board so all people can celebrate what they want, when they want.

[johnboy1975]

Nicola Sturgeons findings on care homes us out " no statistical evidence that releasing covid positive people into carehomes caused covid outbreaks"

This is the scale at which they are prepared to lie to cover themselves

[i4got]

johnboy1975 said:

If the Christian (and let's face it, the non religious who enjoy a good piss up) population got a break in lockdown for Xmas, do you think muslims would be entitled to feel agreived they didn't get one for Eid?

All in this together, and all that?

Should they feel aggrieved? No.

Will they? Almost certainly the press and social media will make that out to be the case.

[Alucidnation]

johnboy1975 said:

Nicola Sturgeons findings on care homes us out " no statistical evidence that releasing covid positive people into carehomes caused covid outbreaks"

This is the scale at which they are prepared to lie to cover themselves

Have you got evidence to the contrary then?

[MikeT66]

gazapc said:

In anycase I don't think we should be making exceptions just for Christmas, we should be rolling back restrictions across the board so all people can celebrate what they want, when they want.

That would be THE best Christmas present.