• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

What we know about Covid so far.

coronavirus

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
231 replies to this topic

#1 osris

  • Guest
  • 531 posts
  • 81

Posted 23 June 2020 - 01:24 PM


Covid is Not a Threat
 
This is on UK.GOV.COM. 
 
"As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK.”
 
 
 
"The new pathogen [Covid-19] is not that dangerous, it is even less dangerous than Sars-1”
 
 
 
"A UK professor from the University of Oxford has revealed how the peak of the UK’s coronavirus ‘crisis’ actually came a full week before Boris Johnson initiated lockdown on March 23rd."
 
 
 
"In short: No, coronavirus is not “20x deadlier” than the flu. The science suggests it may be anything from very slightly worse, to noticeably better."
 
 
 
"NPR: “Mounting Evidence” Suggests COVID Not As Deadly as Thought. Did the Experts Fail Again?"”
 
 
 
The Covid Test is Unreliable
 
“Studies have shown that virus test kits may give a false positive result in some cases. In these cases, the persons may not have contracted the new coronavirus, but one of the existing human coronaviruses [such as] annual common cold and flu epidemics.”
 
 
 
"The hospitals may not have tested the patient for COVID-19 but assumed the death was caused by the virus. The assumption is based on whether a patient presents with COVID-19 symptoms. This is problematic because COVID-19 presents as flu-like symptoms."
 
 
 
“The shortcomings of tests means testing is impractical. As a result, many coronavirus victims we see in the statistics are ‘assumed positive’. The hospitals may not have tested the patient for COVID-19 but assumed the death was caused by the virus."
 
 
 
"150 years ago, scientists constructed principles that can prove whether a microbe is the cause of a disease. Those principles are known as the Koch postulates. From all the information, the coronavirus doesn’t meet any of these tenets."
 
 
 
The Testing Count is Unreliable
 
"What do we know about COVID-19 testing? The numbers are flawed because testing methods have an unacceptably high error rate. People counted as COVID-19 victims actually died of something else." 
 
 
 
"Tens of thousands of coronavirus tests have been double-counted, officials admit."
 
 
 
"The body has many corona strains. So tests for Covid-19, are likely to detect one of these corona strains. So the tests are not accurate, hence the large numbers of people the media reports as having and dying of Covid-19." See also:
 
 
 
Inaccuracy of Covid-19 tests
 
“Some PCR tests register positive for types of coronavirus that have nothing to do with COVID—including plain old coronas that cause nothing more than a cold.”
 
 
 
"What do we know about COVID-19 testing? The numbers are flawed because testing methods have a high error rate. People counted as COVID-19 victims actually died of something else." 
 
 
 
The Death Numbers Have Been Exaggerated
 
"The virus has a low kill rate. The high number of deaths is caused by ventilators and muscle relaxant medication, and the death numbers including people who didn't die of the virus but only suspected of having it." See also:
 
 
 
"The high death rates [from Covid-19] in some countries are due counterproductive treatment methods, such as intubation and the use of steroids."
 
 
 
This is how Covid-19 deaths are counted:
 
"We include all deaths where COVID-19 was mentioned on the death certificate, even if only suspected".
 
 
 
"More than 99% of Italy’s coronavirus fatalities were people who suffered from previous medical conditions, according to a study by the country’s national health authority."
 
 
 
"Both in the UK and the USA, it has been openly admitted by health officials that anyone dying *with* COVID-19, is being categorized as having died *of* it. Its crucially important that we understand the difference."
 
 
 
“Coronavirus deaths ‘may be less than half official toll – as docs wrongly mark certificates’, says ex-WHO chief.”
 
 
 
“Is Britain's Covid-19 death toll HALF of the 50,000 already recorded? Expert claims official tally may be too high because doctors are too keen to name the virus on death certificates and most victims were going to die anyway because they were elderly.”
 
 
 
“The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus.”
 
 
 
"A funeral director, who never met the deceased, can be the qualified informant. This places emphasis on the Medical Certificate of Cause of Death as registration can take place without any input from anyone familiar with the circumstances death."
 
 
 
"Prior to the Coronavirus Act, the last attending doctor to the deceased had the responsibility to register the death. However, in the case of suspected C19 deaths, that duty can be discharged by a doctor who has never met the patient."
 
 
 
"It is crucial to understand that for C19 to be recorded on the MCCD, as the underlying cause of death, there does not need to be any test based diagnosis of the syndrome. Diagnosis can simply be from observation of symptoms."
 
 
 

  • WellResearched x 5
  • Ill informed x 2
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#2 Dorian Grey

  • Guest
  • 2,159 posts
  • 973
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 23 June 2020 - 04:26 PM

Appreciate your compilation osris.  The mismanagement all around has really shaken my faith in science and medicine.  I believe the panic started when China first realized this was a lab-leaked gain of function bug.  Their frantic containment effort was indeed impressive, & spooked the world into an armageddon scenario which was probably justified initially, given the unknown nature of what we were dealing with.  

 

Now it has snow-balled into "all this", and no one wants to admit SARS-CoV-2 is a global endemic infection we're all just going to have to learn to live with.  An effective treatment would certainly be helpful, but the boffins trialing existing meds don't seem to realize antiviral therapy requires early intervention, before viral load reaches critical mass.  The total disregard for the role of correcting deficiencies (Vitamin-D & Zinc) and the potential for combination therapies has been another catastrophic mistake.  Everyone seems to seek only a new silver bullet that will salvage those who've developed complications of advanced disease, when this is the least likely solution we'll see over the next year or so.  

 

Chris Masterjohn was talking about vaccines a couple days back, & pointed out around half of COVID patients appear to develop anti-phospholipid antibodies which promote clotting disorders.  He expressed concern this might also be a potential problem for the vaccines being rushed at warp-speed, which will probably be mandatory, and hopes they will be watching for this.  The potential for a mandatory mass-vaccination SNAFU is my deepest concern.  It's a fine mess, & continued mis-management has a strong potential to make things much worse.  


  • WellResearched x 2
  • Informative x 1
  • like x 1

#3 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,840 posts
  • 721
  • Location:Austria

Posted 23 June 2020 - 04:39 PM

Though one might not agree or like it, it all seems to unfold after the plan:

 


  • Informative x 2
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • dislike x 1

#4 osris

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 531 posts
  • 81

Posted 23 June 2020 - 05:16 PM

Appreciate your compilation osris.  The mismanagement all around has really shaken my faith in science and medicine.  I believe the panic started when China first realized this was a lab-leaked gain of function bug.  Their frantic containment effort was indeed impressive, & spooked the world into an armageddon scenario which was probably justified initially, given the unknown nature of what we were dealing with.  

 

Now it has snow-balled into "all this", and no one wants to admit SARS-CoV-2 is a global endemic infection we're all just going to have to learn to live with.  An effective treatment would certainly be helpful, but the boffins trialing existing meds don't seem to realize antiviral therapy requires early intervention, before viral load reaches critical mass.  The total disregard for the role of correcting deficiencies (Vitamin-D & Zinc) and the potential for combination therapies has been another catastrophic mistake.  Everyone seems to seek only a new silver bullet that will salvage those who've developed complications of advanced disease, when this is the least likely solution we'll see over the next year or so.  

 

Chris Masterjohn was talking about vaccines a couple days back, & pointed out around half of COVID patients appear to develop anti-phospholipid antibodies which promote clotting disorders.  He expressed concern this might also be a potential problem for the vaccines being rushed at warp-speed, which will probably be mandatory, and hopes they will be watching for this.  The potential for a mandatory mass-vaccination SNAFU is my deepest concern.  It's a fine mess, & continued mis-management has a strong potential to make things much worse.  

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

Regarding a vaccine, I personally wouldn't welcome one as things like the following scare me:

 

“Moderna’s chief medical officer has described the company’s products as “hacking the software of life” and permanently altering a person’s genetic code. If Moderna is to bring the covid-19 vaccine to market, a deeper look at his comments are warranted.”

 

https://www.thelasta...iting-vaccines/

 

And:

 

"Zaks spoke about mRNA vaccines, including those he produces at Moderna. Zaks’ description of Moderna’s mRNA products as, making permanent edits to human genes.”

 

https://www.thelasta...iting-vaccines/

 

I prefer a natural alternative approach to all viruses. Vitamin D is one useful supplement as you mention. Also Olive Leaf Extract. 


  • Good Point x 2
  • Ill informed x 1
  • like x 1

#5 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,392 posts
  • -447
  • Location:UK

Posted 23 June 2020 - 08:05 PM

Osris, before posting statements from various media, you might want to check that your sources a good, using mediabiasfactcheck.com, which is a website that rates the factual quality of a media source.

 

 

Many of the sources you posted are dubious at best:

 

For example your 21stcenturywire.com source is classed as moderate level pseudoscience and moderate level conspiracy theory. So not a great source.

 

Your https://off-guardian.org source is  classed as moderate pseudoscience and strong conspiracy theory. So a bad source.

 

Your https://swprs.org source is  classed as moderate conspiracy theory. So not a great source.

 

Your https://www.wakingtimes.com source is  classed as total quackery on the pseudoscience scale, and strong conspiracy theory. So an appallingly bad source.

 

 

 

I am sure you have heard the expression GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). If you are reading garbage, unfortunately your conclusions are going to be garbage. 

 

 

 

 


  • Good Point x 3
  • Ill informed x 3
  • like x 2
  • Informative x 1
  • dislike x 1
  • Disagree x 1
  • Agree x 1

#6 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,840 posts
  • 721
  • Location:Austria

Posted 23 June 2020 - 08:13 PM

Osris, before posting statements from various media, you might want to check that your sources a good, using mediabiasfactcheck.com, which is a website that rates the factual quality of a media source.#...

 

...

 

I am sure you have heard the expression GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). If you are reading garbage, unfortunately your conclusions are going to be garbage. 

 

Its also always worthwile and revealing to search for the real qualification and financial conflicts of interests of any fact-checker site.
 


  • Good Point x 4
  • Informative x 2
  • Ill informed x 1

#7 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,392 posts
  • -447
  • Location:UK

Posted 23 June 2020 - 09:22 PM

Its also always worthwile and revealing to search for the real qualification and financial conflicts of interests of any fact-checker site.
 

 

You can find those details here.

 

Of course, an intelligent person with who has developed nuanced perceptions will not need such a fact-checker site like mediabiasfactcheck.com, as they can judge for themselves when a media source is biased, deals in quackery, or promotes conspiracy theories. 


  • unsure x 1
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Agree x 1

#8 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,840 posts
  • 721
  • Location:Austria

Posted 23 June 2020 - 09:34 PM

You can find those details here.

 

Other than a site own disclosures, it is still worth searching for secondary sources, past court orders, etc. - unless one wants to remain uncritical.

 

 

 


  • Needs references x 1
  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • dislike x 1

#9 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,392 posts
  • -447
  • Location:UK

Posted 23 June 2020 - 09:43 PM

Other than a site own disclosures, it is still worth searching for secondary sources, past court orders, etc. - unless one wants to remain uncritical.

 

The best way to check mediabiasfactcheck.com is to see what it says about news sources that you personally know well, and thus are familiar with their political bias profile, their factual veracity, and any tendencies to pseudoscience or conspiracy theory promotion.

 

So you can check the BBC, CNN, Sky News, France24, etc, and newspapers like the New York Times, the Guardian, the Times, Washington Post.

 

Then you will realize that mediabiasfactcheck.com are pretty accurate. 


Edited by Hip, 23 June 2020 - 09:45 PM.

  • Ill informed x 4
  • Agree x 2
  • Disagree x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#10 osris

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 531 posts
  • 81

Posted 24 June 2020 - 11:49 AM

Osris, before posting statements from various media, you might want to check that your sources a good, using mediabiasfactcheck.com, which is a website that rates the factual quality of a media source.

 

 

Many of the sources you posted are dubious at best:

 

For example your 21stcenturywire.com source is classed as moderate level pseudoscience and moderate level conspiracy theory. So not a great source.

 

Your https://off-guardian.org source is  classed as moderate pseudoscience and strong conspiracy theory. So a bad source.

 

Your https://swprs.org source is  classed as moderate conspiracy theory. So not a great source.

 

Your https://www.wakingtimes.com source is  classed as total quackery on the pseudoscience scale, and strong conspiracy theory. So an appallingly bad source.

 

 

 

I am sure you have heard the expression GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). If you are reading garbage, unfortunately your conclusions are going to be garbage. 

 

I never trust “fact-checking" sites, as they are seldom independent—whatever “independent” could mean in that context. 

 

Besides, I am focusing on the quotes made by scientists not the site itself. A site that a fact-checking site frowns upon could very well quote from a reliable source.

 

It is a form of ad hominem argument to say that because a site is frowned upon then all quotes it uses are untrue.


  • Good Point x 5
  • Ill informed x 1

#11 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,840 posts
  • 721
  • Location:Austria

Posted 24 June 2020 - 12:46 PM

So you can check the BBC, CNN, Sky News, France24, etc, and newspapers like the New York Times, the Guardian, the Times, Washington Post.

 

You're hopelessly disinformed, if you still believe all those media outlets don't have a conflict of interest, by taking advertising money from the pharmaceutical industry.

 

As a health-concerned consumer one always has to check the original studies - concerned about the truth of any media article, likewise the orignal sources.
 


  • Good Point x 3
  • Agree x 2
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#12 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,392 posts
  • -447
  • Location:UK

Posted 24 June 2020 - 01:37 PM

You're hopelessly disinformed, if you still believe all those media outlets don't have a conflict of interest, by taking advertising money from the pharmaceutical industry.

 

As a health-concerned consumer one always has to check the original studies - concerned about the truth of any media article, likewise the orignal sources.
 

 

You are sounding like quaint old hippy, who thinks Mother Nature knows best, and that all that pharmaceutical science creates is bad.

 

 

Well sorry to inform you that it is Mother Nature who brought you all these vicious diseases like smallpox, polio, malaria, cholera, tuberculosis, rabies, syphilis, gonorrhea, leprosy, typhus, tetanus, the Black Death, measles, rubella, and thousands of other afflictions caused by Mother Nature's nasty pathogenic creations. 

 

And sorry to inform you that many common chronic diseases like T1D are being linked to chronic low-level infections with common viruses, suggesting it is Mother Nature who created all these common diseases that afflict humanity.

 

So it is looking like Mother Nature is a bit of bitch!

 

 

Maturity is understanding that nature has created just as many harmful things as benign ones, and that we need science to uncover and ultimately protect us from the numerous nasty creations of nature. Trouble with many modern people is that scientific advance and technologically organized society has already protected them too well from the nasty creations of nature, so they forget how bad nature can be.

 

Many people in wealthy advanced nations have become cut off from the true and often harsh reality of nature, because they are cocooned in the comforts and security of science and technology. Being so cocooned, they become naive like children. It's often these very people who are so well protected by science who have this pro-nature, anti-science stance. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you!


Edited by Hip, 24 June 2020 - 01:51 PM.

  • Agree x 3
  • Unfriendly x 3
  • dislike x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#13 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,047 posts
  • 2,004
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 24 June 2020 - 04:01 PM

I work in media. I see the CNN feed everyday. It is garbage. They are not journalists. Any "fact-checker" site that lists CNN as "unbiased" is wrong. That is my personal perspective from the inside.

 

What is known about COVID so far.

 

1. It is fatal mainly in the obese with chronic health issues and in the frail elderly (not so much for the healthy elderly). CDC estimates an overall fatality rate of 0.26%. Ioaniddis at Stanford estimates the IFR for people under 70 to be 0.04% (pretty close to a bad flu season).

2. It started much earlier than original estimates, according to multiple studies, it was already in Europe by late 2019, maybe spreading in China as early as September 2019.

3. The countries and cities with the highest fatality rates (Northern Italy, Belgium, New York, Minnesota, etc...) were placing infected patients in nursing homes.


  • Good Point x 5
  • Disagree x 1
  • Agree x 1

#14 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,840 posts
  • 721
  • Location:Austria

Posted 24 June 2020 - 04:35 PM

.. and that all that pharmaceutical science creates is bad.

 

How could you ever go so far of topic? The topic is that the pharmaceutical industry - along with their main investors - by now having had the largest gain by all the grants in reasearch money due to the scare-demic. And no one dependent on that money, like the media advertising, can be trusted.

 

Each study has to be verified on its own, each media article too. Absolutely nothing to do with nature, you obviously seem to hate.
 


Edited by pamojja, 24 June 2020 - 04:41 PM.

  • Good Point x 1

#15 gamesguru

  • Guest
  • 3,467 posts
  • 429
  • Location:coffeelake.intel.int

Posted 24 June 2020 - 05:05 PM

I work in media. I see the CNN feed everyday. It is garbage. They are not journalists. Any "fact-checker" site that lists CNN as "unbiased" is wrong. That is my personal perspective from the inside.

 

What is known about COVID so far.

 

1. It is fatal mainly in the obese with chronic health issues and in the frail elderly (not so much for the healthy elderly). CDC estimates an overall fatality rate of 0.26%. Ioaniddis at Stanford estimates the IFR for people under 70 to be 0.04% (pretty close to a bad flu season).

2. It started much earlier than original estimates, according to multiple studies, it was already in Europe by late 2019, maybe spreading in China as early as September 2019.

3. The countries and cities with the highest fatality rates (Northern Italy, Belgium, New York, Minnesota, etc...) were placing infected patients in nursing homes.

 

I'm sure MSNBC is just as guilty of starting flame wars and passing around nonsense as Fox News, but good information is still out there.  It's more of an attitude of mind than a subscription to a particular service.  As long as you remain uncritical of your sources, and just grasp at whatever sensational information appeals at the time, you're not living a truly informed life.

I think this tendency to downplay the lethality could be regretted in the Fall, and it's disrespectful to famalies who have already been devastated by the virus.  What about the guy who lost a brother and now his mom to COVID?  How about all the cases of people dying in their 50s?  Sure there are plenty of cases of people with no symptoms.  Sure this is a new virus and that novelty has to be factored into the deaths, and that could slowly fade a bit.  But even adjusting for all that, there are plenty of estimates above 0.5% fatality still.  This isn't just some joke to be brushed off, we still need to stay on guard.  We're still learning about the virus and how it interacts with different organ systems in different people.

 

Even if most of the deaths are happening in nursing homes, it's a trend that's been repeated across the globe.  Italy, Sweden, and New York have all had nursing home crisis situations.  There are nearly a hundred million elderly or ill Americans, the idea we can isolate that many bodies may need rethinking.


  • Well Written x 1
  • unsure x 1
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#16 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,392 posts
  • -447
  • Location:UK

Posted 24 June 2020 - 05:11 PM

How could you ever go so far of topic? The topic is that the pharmaceutical industry - along with their main investors - by now having had the largest gain by all the grants in reasearch money due to the scare-demic. And no one dependent on that money, like the media advertising, can be trusted.


If you look at the thread title, you will see that the topic is about COVID-19, not the pharma industry. 

Your idea that the pharmaceutical industry biases the media is presented without evidence. Many of the mainstream media articles I read about drugs are those which point out the adverse effects of drugs, or the ineffectiveness of some drugs, not articles which promote drugs. So that does not fit your assertion.

For a long time in the UK, mainstream newspapers have been far more biased towards alternative health than they are towards conventional health. Detox diet nonsense and such like is high on the agenda of many newspapers.

So my experience of the media completely contradicts this idea that they are tools for the pharma industry. 



 

Absolutely nothing to do with nature, you obviously seem to hate.


No, I love nature. I am just not one of these naive people who worship nature and natural medical treatments like a religion, and think nature is all good and all benign.  

 

If Mother Nature were all benign, we would not need pharmaceuticals. Pharmaceuticals are necessary because Mother Nature afflicts all creatures with disease.

 

 

 

 

I work in media. I see the CNN feed everyday. It is garbage. They are not journalists. Any "fact-checker" site that lists CNN as "unbiased" is wrong. That is my personal perspective from the inside.

 

I agree, CNN is a mediocre news channel in terms of factual accuracy, and is clearly biased to liberal views. And that's pretty much exactly what mediabiasfactcheck.com say about CNN:

 

Moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation.  

 

They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes.

 

Factual Reporting: Mixed (which is not a good classification)

 

 


Edited by Hip, 24 June 2020 - 05:31 PM.

  • Pointless, Timewasting x 3
  • Agree x 1

#17 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,840 posts
  • 721
  • Location:Austria

Posted 24 June 2020 - 05:29 PM

No, I love nature. I am just not one of these naive people who worship nature and natural medical treatments like a religion, and think nature is all good and all benign.  

 

If Mother Nature were all benign, we would not need pharmaceuticals. Pharmaceuticals are necessary because Mother Nature afflicts all creatures with disease.

 

Please Hip, your phantasies about me are again leading you completely ashtray and off-topic again.

 

 


  • Good Point x 2
  • Off-Topic x 1
  • Unfriendly x 1
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1

#18 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,392 posts
  • -447
  • Location:UK

Posted 24 June 2020 - 05:42 PM

Please Hip, your phantasies about me are again leading you completely ashtray and off-topic again.

 

I am not referring to anyone in particular.


  • Off-Topic x 1

#19 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,840 posts
  • 721
  • Location:Austria

Posted 24 June 2020 - 06:02 PM

I am not referring to anyone in particular.

 

Than what has this insult of anyone following any religion to do with covid, and how it is portrayed in the media?!?
 


Edited by pamojja, 24 June 2020 - 06:09 PM.

  • Off-Topic x 1

#20 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 570

Posted 24 June 2020 - 06:17 PM

Regarding the opinions of COVID-19 as nothing more than another cold or flu bug with any resulting deaths as expendable and unneeded segments of society will have the silver lining of eliminating the need to chase life extension technology when that segment of society is eliminated... And that is what is slowly (or not so slowly) happening as these same individuals have so cavalierly and ironically pointed out.
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1

#21 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,840 posts
  • 721
  • Location:Austria

Posted 24 June 2020 - 07:26 PM

.. any resulting deaths as expendable and unneeded segments of society ...

 

I don't understand that so many experimenters with novel substances suddenly completely forget about side-effects. It isn't the question at all if there are segments of society are expendable, but rather how many millions more than through corona itself. Is the treatment of the disease worse? - If such question aren't allowed anymore - paradoxicaly from a moralizing standpoint - than we are truely in for a cruel ride:

 

 

COVID – will lockdown lead to a major health disaster

11th June 2020

 

[   This article was published in Russia Today I feel I should mention that I have taken some criticism for writing articles for Russia Today, I have remained silent on the matter up to now.

 

However, I would like to point out that I tried to contact the BBC with regard to many of the issues I have been highlighting e.g. the COVID care home disaster in the UK – no interest. I tried to contact UK newspapers – no interest. And I have a good relationship with a lot of journalists.

 

In addition to this lack of interest in matters that I felt were extremely important, it concerns me that YouTube has a current policy of censoring content critical of COVID orthodoxy. Toby Young, who can be a divisive figure, wrote about this in the Spectator magazine, pointing out that Google and YouTube are using a form of censorship knowns as ‘shadow banning’, which makes content they disapprove of extremely difficult to find.

 

As Toby Young made clear, they shadow banned an interview with Peter Hitchens entitled ‘Lockdown is a catastrophe.’ They also removed an interview with Nobel laureate Michael Levitt called ‘the case against lockdown.’

 

When I criticised the modelling of Imperial College, a huge number of replies came flooding in. They attacked me, but were highly supportive of the modelling, and the Government actions. These posts were from people who have never posted before, or since. Hired guns? I watched an interview where a representative of Facebook explained that they were shutting down any posts on Vitamin C and COVID-19. Calling it fake news. As if they had any idea of the science behind it.

 

Currently, if people wish to point an accusatory finger at news outlets for manipulating and censoring the news, the facts, the information flow, they need to turn their attention a little closer to home. The mainstream media seem to have become what they should never, ever, be. Cheerleaders for their Governments.

 

And no, no-one has paid a single rouble to write this little rant. I have never written anything that I do not believe to be true. More fool me, probably. So, I would like to say thank you to Russia Today for being willing to publish my, completely unedited, thoughts.  ]

 

COVID – will lockdown lead to a major health disaster

 

I fear we may be heading for a post-lockdown health catastrophe that could mirror the disaster of the post-Soviet era.

 

The self-inflicted damage we’ve done to our economies in the name of combating COVID-19 may end up killing far more people than the virus itself. The economic collapse that followed the communist bloc’s break-up caused millions of deaths.

 

There has never been a situation to compare with what we have been living through these past weeks and months. Never in the history of the world have entire countries been locked down. Never have entire countries inflicted such enormous damage to their own economies and distorted their health systems away from all other activities, to deal with a virus.

 

I felt, right from the start, that the potential harms from lockdown could well exceed any – speculative – reduction in COVID deaths. I began by arguing against lockdown from an economic perspective, which many people hated. They felt it was impossible to put a value on a human life,

even to attempt to balance money versus health.

 

Perhaps they were unaware that we do this all the time. It is why NICE – the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence – was established in 2000. It is what all healthcare systems are forced to do. No country can afford to throw unlimited resources at healthcare. We all must decide what we can, and cannot, afford to do. Tough decisions to make, but essential.

 

Perhaps I came at the lockdown from a different viewpoint from most other people. When the pandemic took off, I was analysing the impact of economic and social upheaval on mortality. I was looking specifically at the breakup of the Soviet Union, as I knew that there had been a massive health impact from the rapid and uncontrolled “transformation” from a socialist to a market-based system.

 

An exhaustive study by three Austrian academics of the fallout from the dissolution of the communist bloc demonstrates the economic devastation it wrought:

 

“The immediate economic consequences of transformation were significant falls in gross national product. For example, between 1990 and 1993, real GDP had declined in Lithuania -18 per cent, Ukraine -10 per cent, Russia -10.1 per cent and Tajikistan -12.2 per cent. The first ten years of transformation was a period of great social disruption and chaos. The introduction of a market system of exchange led to a severe decline in gross domestic product, contraction of the labour market, and unemployment leading to social malaise including a rising death and suicide rate.”

 

What was the true impact on health? My main research interest is in cardiovascular medicine, and I was focussed on deaths from coronary heart disease (CHD). In lay terms, this means deaths from heart attacks. I had just put together the graph below, using Lithuania :text=Each%20year%20cardiovascular%20disease%20(CVD,all%20deaths%20in%20the%20EU.' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>data.

covid-deaths-1.png?w=625&h=372

As you can see, there was a dramatic increase in CHD deaths in 1989, the year that the Berlin wall fell. Lithuanians commenced their singing revolution, and there were mass demonstrations for independence, along with significant social upheaval.

 

The Soviet tanks rolled in, stayed for a bit, then rolled back out again, without doing much. Meanwhile, the Lithuanian GDP fell through the floor, and the rate of CHD virtually doubled over the next three years. A great mountain of increased mortality which makes anything from COVID look like a speed bump.

 

Of course, there were things over and above economic woes going on in Lithuania. However, I know that economic worries, by themselves, can be deadly. Perhaps the single deadliest thing of all. For instance, a study in South Africa found that people with significant financial worries were thirteen times more likely to have a heart attack:

 

“People who reported significant financial stress were 13 times more likely to have a heart attack than those who had minimal or no stress. Among those who experienced moderate work-related stress levels, the chances of having a heart attack were 5.6 times higher.”

Lithuania was not the only ex-Soviet country to see a massive increase in death. Not just from CHD, but in all-cause mortality. Here is a section of a report on the break-up:

 

“The transition to market economies in many post-communist societies of the former Soviet Union and other former eastern bloc countries in Europe has produced a ‘demographic collapse,’ Among the most serious findings is a four-year drop in life expectancy among Russian men since 1980, from 62 years to 58.

 

“There were also significant drops in life expectancy in Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria, Latvia, Lithuania, and Romania. The immediate cause of the rising mortality is the ‘rise in self-destructive behaviour, especially among men.’ Old problems such as alcoholism have increased; drug misuse, a relatively new problem in the former communist bloc, has risen dramatically in recent years.” The report, Transition 1999, stated that suicide rates climbed steeply too, by 60% in Russia, 80% in Lithuania, and 95% in Latvia since 1989.

 

Behind the self-destructive behaviour, the authors say, were economic factors, including rising poverty rates, unemployment, financial insecurity, and corruption. Whereas only 4% of the population in the region had incomes equivalent to $4 (£2.50) a day or less in 1988, that figure had climbed to 32% by 1994.

 

“What we are arguing,” said Omar Noman, an economist for the development fund and one of the report’s contributors, “is that the transition to market economies [in the region] is the biggest … killer we have seen in the 20th century, if you take out famines and wars. The sudden shock and what it did to the system … has effectively meant that five million [Russian men’s] lives have been lost in the 1990s.”

 

Five million lives lost in Russia… alone. As I write this, we have reached a worldwide figure of slightly under four hundred thousand deaths from COVID, in total. COVID now seems to be on the way out, and we may never reach half a million deaths in total. The economic impact, however, is only just beginning.

 

Moving back to CHD again, what were the Russian figures for CHD deaths following transition? As with Lithuania, they are quite fascinating, and highly disturbing.

covid-deaths-2.png?w=625&h=368

You may ask why there was a two-year time lag between CHD deaths between Lithuania and Russia. I think the answer is that when the Berlin wall came down in 1989, it triggered an immediate crisis in Lithuania. On the other hand, the rest of the Soviet Union limped on for a couple of years. In 1991 there was an attempted coup, which failed. However, this did signal the end, and the Soviet Union then rapidly broke up.

 

In late 1991, Russia became a separate country, under the leadership of Boris Yeltsin, and it quickly moved to a market-based economy. Some people became eye-wateringly rich – far more became extremely poor. This, the delayed break up, is almost certainly why the Russian death rate lags Lithuania by two years.

 

There is another important difference. Russia did not just have one CHD peak, but two. After rising, then rapidly falling, it changed direction and climbed back up again. Why the double peak?

 

I think this can be explained by the fact that, in August 1998, there was a massive banking collapse. It virtually wiped out the stock market and destroyed the value of the rouble. At the same time, unemployment skyrocketed and the savings of the common man were further obliterated. The recovery took years, as this report makes clear:

 

“The enormity of Russia’s financial collapse on Aug. 17, 1998 only really hit home with me the next day. “We are so f-cked,” George Kogan, one of Moscow’s most famous and longest serving equity salesmen, explained to me standing in the apartment of Simon Dunlop, one of Moscow’s most famous entrepreneurs. “The whole system has just crashed. It will take years for Russia to recover.” 5

 

Having seen the health impact of economic crashes, I hope you can now see why I was deeply concerned about lockdown. It was clear to me that this could mean massive financial hardship, and I feared that the deaths that followed could be catastrophic.

 

When our pandemic “experts” were putting together their models on death rate, did they take any of this into consideration? They did not. But what is the point of any model that does not even bother to consider the potential negative impact of what they are recommending?

 

As a doctor, if I were advising any form of medical treatment, I would be considered negligent if all I did was talk about the benefits. I need to inform the patient about potential downsides. The procedure may not work; you may get worse – and suchlike.

 

We were persuaded into lockdown with the promise that hundreds of thousands of lives could be saved in the UK – and millions worldwide. We were never warned about the many millions of lives that could – and, I fear, will – be lost as a consequence of lockdown. I consider that to be negligent. Especially as, in this case, the patient in question was the entire population of the Earth.

Are 5 million only from heard-attacks from just one country expentable?!? - in exchange for now almost 500.000 covid deaths by now?

 

Life isn't as simplistic as some seem to believe. Every course of action will have addtional ramifications and side-effects. Very few with the most drastic meassures can be saved from covid-19 (as those countries with the longest lockdown and highest loss have shown) - But many more millions than ever possible from covid will die as direct effect from those meassures.


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2
  • Informative x 2

#22 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,392 posts
  • -447
  • Location:UK

Posted 24 June 2020 - 07:33 PM

Incidentally, does anyone feel that Western nations should be embarrassed with themselves, for allowing so many coronavirus deaths to occur? When we compare ourselves to democratic Asian nations like Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and Hong Kong, it's clear that we have allowed this virus to slaughter our people, which was totally unnecessary. 

 

How did this happen? Cleary it is possible to largely prevent these deaths, as these Asian nations have done it. Yet we did not.

 

I almost feel there might be something decadent or even evil about the culture or structural makeup of Western nations that has led to this. Could the fact that opinion and politics is so polarized these days have prevented effective discussion and effective action against coronavirus? Could the amount of opinionated charlatans who take to the Internet to spread bullshit and fake news have clouded the issues? 

 

How did we end up with so many deaths, when Asia shows these are largely preventable?

 

 


Edited by Hip, 24 June 2020 - 07:35 PM.

  • Good Point x 4
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2

#23 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 570

Posted 24 June 2020 - 07:46 PM

Comparing the economic ramifications of a complete, total, and permanent government and resulting economic restructure (USSR) to a couple month temporary shutdown (and more importantly enforced measures like mask wearing and social distancing) is a complete distortion obviously in an attempt to justify your personal agenda. And your reply to my quote was a feeble attempt to twist my point for same agenda. That's all you can do is twist and distort and conspiracy theory but ultimately you won't change the history of this human disaster to fit your agenda.
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • like x 1

#24 Hip

  • Guest
  • 2,392 posts
  • -447
  • Location:UK

Posted 24 June 2020 - 09:05 PM

It is fatal mainly in the obese with chronic health issues and in the frail elderly

 

You might start a new OLB activist movement with statements like that: Obese Lives Matter!


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2
  • like x 2
  • Off-Topic x 1
  • Unfriendly x 1

#25 theone

  • Life Member
  • 167 posts
  • 620
  • Location:Canada
  • NO

Posted 25 June 2020 - 02:21 AM

I work in media. I see the CNN feed everyday. It is garbage. They are not journalists. Any "fact-checker" site that lists CNN as "unbiased" is wrong. That is my personal perspective from the inside.

 

What is known about COVID so far.

 

1. It is fatal mainly in the obese with chronic health issues and in the frail elderly (not so much for the healthy elderly). CDC estimates an overall fatality rate of 0.26%. Ioaniddis at Stanford estimates the IFR for people under 70 to be 0.04% (pretty close to a bad flu season).

2. It started much earlier than original estimates, according to multiple studies, it was already in Europe by late 2019, maybe spreading in China as early as September 2019.

3. The countries and cities with the highest fatality rates (Northern Italy, Belgium, New York, Minnesota, etc...) were placing infected patients in nursing homes.

-

To suggest that the mortality rate is  0.04% or even 0.26% is a bit misleading. In fact the mortality rate is already higher in many countries.  Simply take the total deaths divided by the population size of each  country. This is  going to be the smallest number you can have. Please also keep in mind that we are not even done with this epidemic so this number is only going to get higher.  In fact in most countries well over 90%  have not yet been infected.  Last but not least SARS-CoV-2 infection is unlikely to produce long-lasting protective antibodies against the virus while also causing lasting damage to the lungs,heart, brain, kidneys  and vascular system. Who knows what the fatality rate will be for round two, three and four.
 

 

Studies Report Rapid Loss of COVID-19 Antibodies
 

The results, while preliminary, suggest that survivors of SARS-CoV-2 infection may be susceptible to reinfection within weeks or months.

 

https://www.the-scie...ntibodies-67650

Attached Files


Edited by theone, 25 June 2020 - 03:40 AM.

  • Ill informed x 2
  • like x 1
  • Agree x 1

#26 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,840 posts
  • 721
  • Location:Austria

Posted 25 June 2020 - 08:53 AM

Comparing the economic ramifications of a complete, total, and permanent government and resulting economic restructure (USSR) to a couple month temporary shutdown (and more importantly enforced measures like mask wearing and social distancing) is a complete distortion obviously in an attempt to justify your personal agenda.

 

 

Consider the possibility that my only agenda is a conscience, which wants the least suffering and death on this earth.

 

(That's why in my life I try to choose incomes, which caused the least. Since any occupation these days does have some harm in 'side-effects' to either the environment or people. And for reducing those side-effect always with the least neccessary to pay my humble pills. That's why I became vegetarian at age 10. That's also why I choose never to own a private car again at age 20. 32 years later I'm still own a cycle only.)

 

 

I'm of course not an economist, but there have been already many who compared the amount of depth created now, to that after the second world-war. A time of a complete govermental and ecconomic restructuring!

 

Unemployment again compared to after 2nd world-war, which even could get worse when all that bail-out money runs out, delayed commotidies payments are due to be paid back. More unemployment will cause more bankruptsies by less consumer-consumption. More bankrupsies the depts not served will get some banks in trouples again, and much much worse than 2008.

 

The heck, now a large investor could by up very large and before healthy companies like the Lufthansa, which either way again will lead to further lay-offs.

 

And your reply to my quote was a feeble attempt to twist my point for same agenda. That's all you can do is twist and distort and conspiracy theory but ultimately you won't change the history of this human disaster to fit your agenda.

 

You seem to assume that anyone not sharing your not very farsighted view must be evil? The truth is of course: history already runs its course. And none of us both by sharing our differing views here will change this cost in human lifes disaster anymore.


 


Edited by pamojja, 25 June 2020 - 09:45 AM.

  • Good Point x 2
  • Off-Topic x 1

#27 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,840 posts
  • 721
  • Location:Austria

Posted 25 June 2020 - 12:31 PM

To suggest that the mortality rate is  0.04% or even 0.26% is a bit misleading. In fact the mortality rate is already higher in many countries. Simply take the total deaths divided by the population size of each  country. This is going to be the smallest number you can have.

 

Leaving out the majority of develping countries, were death-numbers aren't even a little relyable, the smallest number for example are:

 

Taiwan 0.3 per million population

Hongkong 0.9 per million

Slowakia 5 per million
South Korea 6 per million

Japan 8 per million

Greece 18 per million

Bulgaria 30 per million

 

Therefore in the worse of those, Bulgaria - incidentally without lockdown - 0.003%; and 0.00003% in Taiwan!

 

The worst would be San Marino with 1238 per million: 0.12%

 

 

Nevertheless, just a new antibody study was reported in the media here (haven't found the original yet) done in Ischgl (the hotspot in Austria) with about 79% of the population tested. About 42,4% seem to have had covid (alledgedly the highest rate found anywhere yet), 85% of them didn't mentioned, 15% with former positive PCR result.

 

With a population of 1617 (only 9 patients treated in hospital, 1 in the ICU) and 2 deaths, acording to this media report expicitly 'with or because of' would be 0,12%, and a CFR of about 0,26%. And that at a place with highest percentage of infected, found so far.


Edited by pamojja, 25 June 2020 - 12:33 PM.

  • WellResearched x 1

#28 osris

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 531 posts
  • 81

Posted 25 June 2020 - 01:08 PM

I think this tendency to downplay the lethality could be regretted in the Fall, and it's disrespectful to famalies who have already been devastated by the virus.  What about the guy who lost a brother and now his mom to COVID?  How about all the cases of people dying in their 50s?  Sure there are plenty of cases of people with no symptoms.  

 

The virus has a low kill rate. The high number of deaths is caused by ventilators and muscle relaxant medication, and the death numbers including people who didn't die of the virus but only suspected of having it. See also:

 

https://www.telegrap...6ajncWKoKrJ_coo

 


  • Ill informed x 2
  • Good Point x 1
  • Disagree x 1
  • Agree x 1

#29 osris

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 531 posts
  • 81

Posted 25 June 2020 - 01:16 PM

Incidentally, does anyone feel that Western nations should be embarrassed with themselves, for allowing so many coronavirus deaths to occur? 

 

This is how Covid-19 deaths are counted:

 

"We include all deaths where COVID-19 was mentioned on the death certificate, even if only suspected".

 

Not exactly accurate is it?

 

https://blog.ons.gov...e0b76ebfda573c8

 

 

"More than 99% of Italy’s coronavirus fatalities were people who suffered from previous medical conditions, according to a study by the country’s national health authority."

 

https://www.bloomber...fqpwuvUJgFTH_FA

 

 

“Is Britain's Covid-19 death toll HALF of the 50,000 already recorded? Expert claims official tally may be too high because doctors are too keen to name the virus on death certificates and most victims were going to die anyway because they were elderly.”

 

https://www.dailymai...18228&si=464550


  • Informative x 3
  • Ill informed x 2

#30 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 570

Posted 25 June 2020 - 02:10 PM

This is how Covid-19 deaths are counted:

"We include all deaths where COVID-19 was mentioned on the death certificate, even if only suspected".

Not exactly accurate is it?


But this is exactly how all flu deaths have always been counted according to the CDC website and discussed in previous threads. So when comparing to the "common" flu, it's calculated on the same base as has been always used. Nothing different there. Historically, any deaths involving any upper respiratory symptoms have always been counted as annual flu deaths so nothing new here. And so many died before testing was available without even considering situations where the hospitals were overrun and flooded with patients... They didn't have enough resources to deal with the sick and dying that testing was the last thing they were concerned with. Would it be fair to not count the obvious deaths just because testing wasn't done due to resources not available and the fact that it's not going to change or improve the situation for the medical system when they have bigger issues to deal with? And remember, this disaster isn't even half over yet and is continuing full speed as we speak. The deaths are not slowing down.

And all the deaths doesn't even take into account all the cases of people (many young people) with permanent organ and lung damage that will affect both their quality of life and future length of life.

The better question is what is your agenda to minimize and downplay this disaster? Do you truly believe that it's a hoax and all the people that have died and are continuing to die didn't happen and won't happen?
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • like x 1





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: coronavirus

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users