Corona virus on its own thread.

SUPPORT THE SITE!
January Goal: £100.00
Donations so far: £40.00

Smurf

Auld Enuff Tae Know Better This Radge
Joined
May 15, 2003
Messages
38,606
Reaction score
4,866
Points
178
I think when the information is reviewed from the pandemic in a few years time, we will find lots of mistakes were made. The actions were probably made for the right reasons, based on the information that was available at the time, but they turned out to be the wrong actions.

That won't just be the politicians, that will be scientists too. And when scientists and politicians get together you have sufficiently murky waters to give everyone plausible deniability.

Edit: and of course, once politicians and scientists are aware of mistakes, they will do everything possible to cover their tracks, to stop the likes of us finding out about them. The Pandemic has made a lot of people very rich.
Won't read anything more accurate all day. Spot. On.
 

hibadelic

Radge-a-Casblanca
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
8,521
Reaction score
497
Points
93
Pretty ironic when you're challenging the opinions of a hugely respected guy in Professor Francois Balloux who is the director of the UCL Genetics Institute and a professor of computational biology at University College London.

Not really. He's being challenged by a lot of people much more qualified than me and I'm just pointing that out.

My point is more that you've not highlighted any of the controversy around what he's saying but are simply presenting it without question because it suits what you want to hear. I'm just trying to get you to consider what you read rather than search for the things that suit you and only take those uncritically.
 

Smurf

Auld Enuff Tae Know Better This Radge
Joined
May 15, 2003
Messages
38,606
Reaction score
4,866
Points
178
Not really. He's being challenged by a lot of people much more qualified than me and I'm just pointing that out.

My point is more that you've not highlighted any of the controversy around what he's saying but are simply presenting it without question because it suits what you want to hear. I'm just trying to get you to consider what you read rather than search for the things that suit you and only take those uncritically.
I read and listen to everything Professor Christina Pagel says. More mainstream media organisations wheel her out than Professor Francois Balloux... Maybe because she's much more pessimistic and would appear to want to have us in permanent lockdown. I do think it has all become far too political. I'm not so sure its really as simple that right wing folk couldn't care about loss of life and left wing folk want to minimise loss of life at all cost. However, certainly on social media that's become the narrative.
 

Jack

Aulder Than The Internet This Radge
Thread starter
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
15,334
Reaction score
3,672
Points
144
And how many people in hospital with covid are actually there for something completely different.. or went in with something different and contracted covid while there
Figures due to be published today.
 

Purple & Green

Radge McRadge
Admin
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
16,408
Reaction score
5,272
Points
128

Latest statistics on England mortality data suggest systematic mis-categorisation of vaccine status and uncertain effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccination​


The risk/benefit of Covid vaccines is arguably most accurately measured by an all-cause mortality rate comparison of vaccinated against unvaccinated, since it not only avoids most confounders relating to case definition but also fulfils the WHO/CDC definition of "vaccine effectiveness" for mortality.

We examine the latest UK ONS vaccine mortality surveillance report which provides the necessary information to monitor this crucial comparison over time. At first glance the ONS data suggest that, in each of the older age groups, all-cause mortality is lower in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. Despite this apparent evidence to support vaccine effectiveness-at least for the older age groups-on closer inspection of this data, this conclusion is cast into doubt because of a range of fundamental inconsistencies and anomalies in the data.

Whatever the explanations for the observed data, it is clear that it is both unreliable and misleading. While socio-demographical and behavioural differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated have been proposed as possible explanations, there is no evidence to support any of these. By Occam's razor we believe the most likely explanations are systemic miscategorisation of deaths between the different categories of unvaccinated and vaccinated; delayed or non-reporting of vaccinations; systemic underestimation of the proportion of unvaccinated; and/or incorrect population selection for Covid deaths.

8 minute radio interview


@Smurf

Came up on my twitter feed today, thought it might interest you. If I find a critical review of the paper I'll post it up too, although he does say that whilst his work was happily peer reviewed at the beginning he says it is much more difficult to get it peer reviewed now as it doesn't fit the narrative.

As an aside my go to on medical matters is @draseemmalhotra who I've followed for years prior to the pandemic. Very one sided though and very vaccine sceptical.
 
Last edited:

joethehibby

Well-Known Radge
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
2,535
Reaction score
1,038
Points
128
My son had to go into victoria hospital in fife for an outpatient treatment and the conversation went regarding covid was that the majority of patients with covid were younger / unvaccinated people , some of whom were really ill and unfortunately some deaths 😩. Also a fair number of unvaccinated pregnant women in hospital with it 🤔
 

bigmanandy

Legendary Radge
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
9,919
Reaction score
1,544
Points
123
Incredible statistics. View attachment 7379
Should be mandatory vaccinations implemented unless exempt.
I say this as a double vaccination nhs worker, your post is an abhorrance, and Im not sure you fully understand the implications of such a stance. Its horrific this is even a trope of the wider shamdemic debate.

So how do we stop 1000s more deaths and restrictions for years to come because the unvaxed clog up the NHS and it can't function every winter....
 

hibadelic

Radge-a-Casblanca
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
8,521
Reaction score
497
Points
93
And how many people in hospital with covid are actually there for something completely different.. or went in with something different and contracted covid while there

The figures from England were about two thirds admitted "for" covid and a third "with" covid.
 

hibadelic

Radge-a-Casblanca
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
8,521
Reaction score
497
Points
93
I read and listen to everything Professor Christina Pagel says. More mainstream media organisations wheel her out than Professor Francois Balloux... Maybe because she's much more pessimistic and would appear to want to have us in permanent lockdown. I do think it has all become far too political. I'm not so sure its really as simple that right wing folk couldn't care about loss of life and left wing folk want to minimise loss of life at all cost. However, certainly on social media that's become the narrative.

The idea that anyone beyond fringe loonies wants permanent lockdown is a wilful misinterpretation of what they're actually saying. It's conspiracy theory bullshit, worthy of Ryan69 types.
 

hibadelic

Radge-a-Casblanca
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
8,521
Reaction score
497
Points
93

Latest statistics on England mortality data suggest systematic mis-categorisation of vaccine status and uncertain effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccination​


The risk/benefit of Covid vaccines is arguably most accurately measured by an all-cause mortality rate comparison of vaccinated against unvaccinated, since it not only avoids most confounders relating to case definition but also fulfils the WHO/CDC definition of "vaccine effectiveness" for mortality.

We examine the latest UK ONS vaccine mortality surveillance report which provides the necessary information to monitor this crucial comparison over time. At first glance the ONS data suggest that, in each of the older age groups, all-cause mortality is lower in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. Despite this apparent evidence to support vaccine effectiveness-at least for the older age groups-on closer inspection of this data, this conclusion is cast into doubt because of a range of fundamental inconsistencies and anomalies in the data.

Whatever the explanations for the observed data, it is clear that it is both unreliable and misleading. While socio-demographical and behavioural differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated have been proposed as possible explanations, there is no evidence to support any of these. By Occam's razor we believe the most likely explanations are systemic miscategorisation of deaths between the different categories of unvaccinated and vaccinated; delayed or non-reporting of vaccinations; systemic underestimation of the proportion of unvaccinated; and/or incorrect population selection for Covid deaths.

8 minute radio interview


@Smurf

Came up on my twitter feed today, thought it might interest you. If I find a critical review of the paper I'll post it up too, although he does say that whilst his work was happily peer reviewed at the beginning he says it is much more difficult to get it peer reviewed now as it doesn't fit the narrative.

As an aside my go to on medical matters is @draseemmalhotra who I've followed for years prior to the pandemic. Very one sided though and very vaccine sceptical.
Interesting. On the 14 day after vaccination point, might that be deliberate and reasonable as it takes time for the vaccine to work?

When you consider the stats Smurf posted this morning, it's hard to get your head around what he's actually saying. Not that I'm dismissing it but those figures seem pretty conclusive (along with the numerous efficacy studies for each vaccine before release) that the un-vaccinated are much more likely to go to hospital, die etc. so not surprising that he's having difficulty getting traction wrt peer reviews etc.
 

joethehibby

Well-Known Radge
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
2,535
Reaction score
1,038
Points
128
Interesting. On the 14 day after vaccination point, might that be deliberate and reasonable as it takes time for the vaccine to work?

When you consider the stats Smurf posted this morning, it's hard to get your head around what he's actually saying. Not that I'm dismissing it but those figures seem pretty conclusive (along with the numerous efficacy studies for each vaccine before release) that the un-vaccinated are much more likely to go to hospital, die etc. so not surprising that he's having difficulty getting traction wrt peer reviews etc.
Mibby an anti-vax loony infiltrated that dept 🤔🤪
 

joethehibby

Well-Known Radge
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
2,535
Reaction score
1,038
Points
128
Maybe not compulsory vaccines , but stricter controls/ better governance of covid passports by way of ID cards incorporating your covid passport . So unvaccinated forget nightclubs , pubs theatres, cinemas , big crowd events etc etc that will separate the wood from the chaff 😜
 

joethehibby

Well-Known Radge
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
2,535
Reaction score
1,038
Points
128
England hasn't had 500 deaths in 2 days though. It's been less. The 300+ figure given on Wed had a lag in them.
Over 200 tday again, so not catch up I’m afraid , bungling boris 🤷‍♂️
 

emerald green

Well-Known Radge
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Messages
4,695
Reaction score
1,903
Points
138
Should be mandatory vaccinations implemented unless exempt.


So how do we stop 1000s more deaths and restrictions for years to come because the unvaxed clog up the NHS and it can't function every winter....
I dont really know the answer to that tbh, its a multi layered solution....but 100% Not with what you are suggesting bud..... but I totally understand your frustrations with this. Its such a steep slippery slope and if we go down that route there will be carnage everywhere. Dystopian nightmare
 

Purple & Green

Radge McRadge
Admin
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
16,408
Reaction score
5,272
Points
128
Interesting. On the 14 day after vaccination point, might that be deliberate and reasonable as it takes time for the vaccine to work?

When you consider the stats Smurf posted this morning, it's hard to get your head around what he's actually saying. Not that I'm dismissing it but those figures seem pretty conclusive (along with the numerous efficacy studies for each vaccine before release) that the un-vaccinated are much more likely to go to hospital, die etc. so not surprising that he's having difficulty getting traction wrt peer reviews etc.
Yes, it might, I think "we" probably don't have the knowledge or the skill set to fully analyse how that particular nuance should be interpreted from the figures.

On the subject of efficacy he quoted one study that showed that Pfizer had lower efficacy than the placebo in the trial, but both numbers were so incredibly low that it might not be considered statistically significant.

My general concern with Pfizer et al, is that their interest in the vaccine is driven by profit, it's helpful to find information that isn't tainted with that particular money...which is incredibly hard because everyone seems to be coming at this from a vested interest.
 

Purple & Green

Radge McRadge
Admin
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
16,408
Reaction score
5,272
Points
128
Maybe not compulsory vaccines , but stricter controls/ better governance of covid passports by way of ID cards incorporating your covid passport . So unvaccinated forget nightclubs , pubs theatres, cinemas , big crowd events etc etc that will separate the wood from the chaff 😜

It seems to be that the key factor for access to things is to provide evidence that you currently do not carry the virus. Vaccination seems a really ineffective way to do this, given the limited effective period of cover (10 weeks?) and even when you are "covered" you can still catch the virus and pass on the virus.

So, what is really required is evidence of a negative test?

Forcing people to be vaccinated to go to work, or to a place of entertainment is an erosion of freedom that I think we will regret. If people are sceptical about the vaccination, I think education and putting forward a better argument is the path we should take not coercion, bullying and intimidation. IMHO.
 

joethehibby

Well-Known Radge
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
2,535
Reaction score
1,038
Points
128
It seems to be that the key factor for access to things is to provide evidence that you currently do not carry the virus. Vaccination seems a really ineffective way to do this, given the limited effective period of cover (10 weeks?) and even when you are "covered" you can still catch the virus and pass on the virus.

So, what is really required is evidence of a negative test?

Forcing people to be vaccinated to go to work, or to a place of entertainment is an erosion of freedom that I think we will regret. If people are sceptical about the vaccination, I think education and putting forward a better argument is the path we should take not coercion, bullying and intimidation. IMHO.
I tested negative twice in 24 hours using lft and was pos with pcr , so to me lft’s are not At all reliable 🤷‍♂️
 

GORDONSMITH7

Admin
Joined
Jun 28, 2002
Messages
9,698
Reaction score
6,415
Points
143
Should be mandatory vaccinations implemented unless exempt.


So how do we stop 1000s more deaths and restrictions for years to come because the unvaxed clog up the NHS and it can't function every winter....
I know, you know, politicians in ever Capitalist nation in the World including Russia and China, Internationally scientists, capitalist Big Pharma money making Corporations, know that the nations where there have been little to no vaccinations taking place should be a priority to ensure this cycle of infection and deaths is booted into touch. Let your favourite politicians or scientists naval gaze. What a distraction from the big game in town. Several elephants in our small planet room.

Vaccination Nationalism gives me the boak. Not a likely cure for that.

BIG G
 

Purple & Green

Radge McRadge
Admin
Joined
Jun 27, 2002
Messages
16,408
Reaction score
5,272
Points
128
I tested negative twice in 24 hours using lft and was pos with pcr , so to me lft’s are not At all reliable 🤷‍♂️
Ha!

This very morning I got PCR results which say I am positive, despite negative LFTs on numerous occasions in the last 3 weeks. I only got a PCR because I briefly met someone on NYD who went on to test positive. No symptoms whatsoever despite my advancing years.

So, despite the accuracy figures getting quoted, I share your concerns!
 
Want to get rid of the ads?
Sign up For a Private Membership!
Click Here
Top