More Boris lockdown breaches

[johnofgwent]

Oh FFS John we've already shredded that idiocy.

You're good with maths, see my May 27, 2023, 12:06:17 pm » post (aka reply 81)

Hint:  actually very few people die on the A4119 compared to the Covid death numbers

No we have not 'shredded that idiocy'

it is a fact that Boris had to make a statement that the numbers counted as dying from Covid were inflated because they took as gospel the fact that if you died within 30 days of a positive test you died of covid.

a one off adjustment was made to the ons figures.

As professor brian cox says of the big bang 'we know it happenned because you can fucking see it'

but for literally months after that howler which i freely admit might have been the most idiotic honest mistake ever and not a deliberate attempt by Ferguson the Covid spreading carpet shagger to terrorise people into believing his bullshit, every night the BBC and Shy news said 'today another x people died of Covid' while the caption on the screen said in tiny print this was the total number dying of any reason within 30 days of a covid positive test.

as i have repeatedly said, i know and have met to chat with a few notable people who are no longer with us thanks to the fucking chinese pox. Two of my wife's work colleagues at tbe immigration tribunal are dead because some fucking illegal brought the fucking pox into this country and her courtroom where he gave it to everone including my wife who gave it to me and i nearly fucking died of it.

BUT that doesn't excuse the fucking lies told by the BBC and Sky News long, long after the 'error' was revealed and corrected. They did the campaign to warn peolke of tbe very real dangers absolutely no fucking favours at all.

[Scott777]

Complete BS^.  You were given the link proving your idiot 'positive test with just a cold' theory was just made up junk

BS ^.  You proved NOTHING.  When politicians, including Dominic Raab and Boris Johnson, and the inventor of PCR, tell you PCR is not a reliable test for infection, try to pay attention.  If there is even a small chance of false positive, and you test people a million times, they are certain to eventually get a false positive.

[Scott777]

Hi, Superman. Maybe no one remembers the government telling us the jab neither prevents infection, nor prevents passing on the infection.
I do.

I can't expect too much of mere mortals.  Hello again, nice to see you are still about.  😉

[Scott777]

"When we say that a death was 'due to' COVID-19, we mean that COVID-19 was the underlying cause of death, because it was either the only health condition mentioned on the death certificate, or it was the one that started the train of events leading to death"

If it isn't mentioned in part 1, but is In part 2 then the death is an "involved COVID"

You cannot reconcile these two statements.  Sorry if your powers of reasoning (or reading) have let you down.

[Unlucky4Sum]

No you haven't, my sister died in 18 months from initial diagnosis due to a tumour the size of a lemon. In the last month of her life she had Covid and managed to shrug it off. It had zero bearing on her death, why is it on her DC? She is also counted in your 140K deaths: this is fact, not some made up scenario.

Oh yes I have

Gave you the detail maths.  Put simply over the 38 month span of Covid in the UK an average of 1 in 123 people had Covid in a 28 day window.  So at most you can claim 1/123 of the ~1.6M that would have died of other causes in that time might have been misclassed as Covid deaths.  

ie about 13,000 out of 221,000.   So you're still left with 200,000+ Covid deaths and your 35,000 figure is just made up nonsense.  

[Nick]

Oh FFS John we've already shredded that idiocy.

You're good with maths, see my May 27, 2023, 12:06:17 pm » post (aka reply 81)

Hint:  actually very few people die on the A4119 compared to the Covid death numbers

No you haven't, my sister died in 18 months from initial diagnosis due to a tumour the size of a lemon. In the last month of her life she had Covid and managed to shrug it off. It had zero bearing on her death, why is it on her DC? She is also counted in your 140K deaths: this is fact, not some made up scenario. 

[Barry]

And yet you can't actually quote the words you suppose are on that site to back you. 

I thought you would be triggered SteveK, but of course, you can't delete my comments here.
The thing is, you didn't allow any comments that showed any negativity towards the experimental jabs on your forum, even those that were true.
So you want me to show chapter and verse, I could, but if it's TLDR for you, tough. 

[Unlucky4Sum]

It is not worded that way on the government website:
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

And yet you can't actually quote the words you suppose are on that site to back you.  

[Unlucky4Sum]

Hi, Superman. Maybe no one remembers the government telling us the jab neither prevents infection, nor prevents passing on the infection.
I do.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-what-to-expect-after-vaccination/what-to-expect-after-your-covid-19-vaccination


https://ukhsa.blog.gov.uk/2022/02/10/how-well-do-vaccines-protect-against-omicron-what-the-data-shows/

Unlucky4Sum, eh?

FFS you are David Icke and I claim my five free strait jackets.  You do realise you have woefully failed to quote any text from those links to back your false assertion.

[Unlucky4Sum]

Except that as you well know, the figures for Covid deaths counted everyone who died from any reason whatsoever within 30 days of a positive COVID test. A bloje who was run over by a truck on the A4119 at 3am after walking home pissed off his fucking head up the m4 at Capel Llaniltern was added to the deaths due to Covid.

LONG after the scam was discovered and the ONS were forced to adjust the deaths figures, both the BBC and Sky continued to broadcast the rubbish 'of any reason whatsoever' figures each night ...

Oh FFS John we've already shredded that idiocy. 

You're good with maths, see my  May 27, 2023, 12:06:17 pm » post (aka reply 81)

Hint:  actually very few people die on the A4119 compared to the Covid death numbers

[johnofgwent]

You realise that isn't a real DC? It was made up to illustrate the multiple field nature of death scertifixstw and how they are designed to allow things to be on the death certificate as contributor conditions but not as underlying causes. 

In that Hypothetical statistical cause of death would be RTA as it was the lowest line of "part 1"

Again in direct you to the guidance for filling in DCs

As you can see the guidance directs that the underlying cause of death can be an accident which produces the fatal injury.

So an asymptomatic (or even symptomatic) person who was hit by a bus would not be counted in the "due to covid" count because the cause of death would be "hit by a bus", despite covid possibly being mentioned in part 2 (contributing causes). They would be in the "involving COVID" count. Which is why the ONS (and me) have been at pains to point out and clarify the differences.

As I said, the death certificate system has been designed especially to allow for fairly fine grained statistical analysis. They are an important part of public health world wide. The ONS are professional statisticians who are well practiced in analysing exactly this sort of data.

How do you think we know the number of people who die of obesity related conditions? How do we know the most common causes of death for certain age groups?

Except that as you well know, the figures for Covid deaths counted everyone who died from any reason whatsoever within 30 days of a positive COVID test. A bloje who was run over by a truck on the A4119 at 3am after walking home pissed off his fucking head up the m4 at Capel Llaniltern was added to the deaths due to Covid.

LONG after the scam was discovered and the ONS were forced to adjust the deaths figures, both the BBC and Sky continued to broadcast the rubbish 'of any reason whatsoever' figures each night ...

[Barry]

I have said several times on this forum, I had Covid 3 times.  The original strain in February 2020, then Delta, then Omicron.  It started like the flu (basically), then got easier with each variant.  (And I guess I must be superman, cos aint got no jab).  😉

Hi, Superman. Maybe no one remembers the government telling us the jab neither prevents infection, nor prevents passing on the infection.
I do.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-what-to-expect-after-vaccination/what-to-expect-after-your-covid-19-vaccination


https://ukhsa.blog.gov.uk/2022/02/10/how-well-do-vaccines-protect-against-omicron-what-the-data-shows/

Unlucky4Sum, eh?

[Barry]

It is not worded that way on the government website:
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

[BeElBeeBub]

I'm afraid you are mis-interpreting "UNDERLYING CAUSE".  It cannot mean only when mentioned in part 1, because that contradicts the first quote above, where "UNDERLYING CAUSE" is given as a number of options, including when it's the only health condition mentioned on the death certificate.  That does not say anything about "only in part 1".

No, you are.the one misunderstanding "When we say that a death was 'due to' COVID-19, we mean that COVID-19 was the underlying cause of death, because it was either the only health condition mentioned on the death certificate, or it was the one that started the train of events leading to death"

Part 1 is always filled out.  It's pretty much the core part of a death certificate.

If COVID is mentioned in that, then it's part of the underlying train of events that led to death.

If it isn't mentioned in part 1, but is In part 2 then the death is an "involved COVID"

But part 1 will still be filled in with whatever the underlying cause was (cancer, heart disease, bus etc) which is a health condition.

The only time COVID is the only health condition mentioned on the death certificate is of.it is literally 1a) and nothing else filled out 

You seem to imagine a case wee somebody dies, and part 1 has stuff that is not a disease (say gunshot wound to the head) but they have covid listed in part 2 (which would be odd unless it had some.bearing on the death aybe they had a coughing fit whilst shooting and accidentally blew their head off) and the stats.nerds look at that and go "the only medical sounding thing there is COVID, so that's what they died of - stick it in the count".


It doesn't work that way.

The computer searches through part 1, if COVID is the last like listed (either 1a, 1b or 1c) it's +1 for "due to", if COVID iis only mentioned in part 2, it's +1 for "involved". If COVID is not found at all,.then it's on to the next record.


It's the same process they use for tallying other death types. It's why the certificates are designed that way.  

Do you not trust the statistics on other causes of death? Heart disease? Are they getting that wrong?  How about knife deaths Vs gunshot? Poisonings? Dementia?  Are.all those stats wrong too because professional statisticians haven't spotted what scott777 has?

[Unlucky4Sum]

It hasn't been "shredded" at all.  First of all, there is no way to know how many died from Covid, because if you had a cold, and got tested (as many people did a lot), using PCR which has a pathetic level of accuracy, then eventually you will get a positive result, and therefore most cases of colds or the flu would be ASSUMED to be Covid, so if an elderly person dies, they ASSUME it was Covid.  The figures are junk.  Only total deaths are relevant.

Complete BS^.  You were given the link proving your idiot 'positive test with just a cold' theory was just made up junk