New coronavirus in/from China

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 01 Nov 2020, 19:19

Oh you can find a week with lower deaths this year then that week last year but for seven of the last eight weeks the death count is higher then last year by about 300 per week.
In contrast the first twelve weeks of the year had ten weeks with lower death counts then the year previous. Then the first wave hit.

Catweazle · Post by **Catweazle** » 01 Nov 2020, 19:50

The number of deaths registered in the UK in the week ending 16 October 2020 (Week 42) was 11,928, which was 726 deaths higher than the five-year average and 569 deaths more than Week 41; of the deaths registered in the UK in Week 42, 761 deaths involved COVID-19, 287 deaths higher than in Week 41.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... nal/latest

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 01 Nov 2020, 21:36

Little John. While I agree with you that new lockdowns are counter productive I see the evidence you are using as false and therefor actually undermining your position. There are increased total deaths and that is a fact you can not quibble away.
I would look at the actual cost of the lockdowns and weigh them against the actual higher deaths. The number of jobs lost permanently, the number of small business forced into bankruptcy, The wages and productivity lost and the stress that is placed on the suddenly unemployed with the higher substance abuse, spouse and child abuse, drug and alcohol consumption and suicides resulting. That is where your winning argument lies.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 01 Nov 2020, 21:38

vtsnowedin wrote:Little John. While I agree with you that new lockdowns are counter productive I see the evidence you are using as false and therefor actually undermining your position. There are increased total deaths and that is a fact you can not quibble away.
I would look at the actual cost of the lockdowns and weigh them against the actual higher deaths. The number of jobs lost permanently, the number of small business forced into bankruptcy, The wages and productivity lost and the stress that placed on the suddenly unemployed with the higher substance abuse, spouse and child abuse, drug and alcohol consumption and suicides resulting. That is where your winning argument lies.

The data I presented was not false. It is taken directly from the ONS excel documents for 2019 and 2020 for the weeks ending October 16th/18th respectively

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 01 Nov 2020, 21:43

Little John wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:Little John. While I agree with you that new lockdowns are counter productive I see the evidence you are using as false and therefor actually undermining your position. There are increased total deaths and that is a fact you can not quibble away.
I would look at the actual cost of the lockdowns and weigh them against the actual higher deaths. The number of jobs lost permanently, the number of small business forced into bankruptcy, The wages and productivity lost and the stress that placed on the suddenly unemployed with the higher substance abuse, spouse and child abuse, drug and alcohol consumption and suicides resulting. That is where your winning argument lies.
The data I presented was not false. It is taken directly from the ONS excel documents for 2019 and 2020 for the weeks ending October 16th/18th respectively

Again you are using just a couple of weeks which are more then balanced out by other weeks. You are cherry picking data.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 01 Nov 2020, 21:51

If you add up weeks 39 to 42 you get 40,067 vs 38,608 for the same weeks five year average a difference of 1458 or 365 per week.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 02 Nov 2020, 07:26

A Useful Pandemic: Davos Launches New â€˜Reset,â€™ this Time on the Back of COVID

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/10/ ... 04gg5gkHiY

raspberry-blower · Post by **raspberry-blower** » 02 Nov 2020, 10:18

There is the European Mortality Monitoring project that has been in operation since 2008. It is designed to look at excess deaths "through influenza and other possible health threats across participating European Countries."

The key metric used to determine this is a z-score

So, here are z-scores of participating European Countries 2015 - 2020

PS_RalphW · Post by **PS_RalphW** » 05 Nov 2020, 16:57

Just when you thought it was safe to come out of the basement....

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... tists-warn

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 05 Nov 2020, 17:00

Yes I saw that and thought "Nope, I'm just going to pretend I never saw it and it doesn't exist.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 05 Nov 2020, 21:34

Dr Mike Yeadon: Coronavirus pandemic is 'fundamentally over in the UK'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FQUmw5 ... cS0yeBV7vI

Snail · Post by **Snail** » 06 Nov 2020, 01:16

I haven't watched the video yet, but looked at the comments. Old news but passed me by:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... ontracted/

Nice.

Also seen tonight's papers:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/1 ... irst-wave/

and previously:

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/6 ... incorrect/

"During the news conference on Saturday night, Prof Whitty also revealed a "hospital heat map".
They presented the charts to show that the areas marked in red now had more Covid patients than at the peak of the virus.
Amber shows that there was more than half as many than the peak, and green shows fewer patients than at the peak.
The experts mapped just 29 NHS hospitals when there is in fact 482.
On October 31, figures showed that there were 9,213 patients in hospital with the disease compared with 17,171 at the peak"

"Looking at the full NHS data set from all 482 hospitals and there are 232 hospitals that have no Covid patients at all."

It's all obvious anyway, of course, and not surprising. Nothing new.

A mass of gullibles, corrupt media, unethical 'experts' who prostitute themselves. Very sad.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 07 Nov 2020, 07:58

What a surprise...

Covid lockdown stats FALSE: Whitty and Vallance quietly change data after 'scaring' Brits

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/13567 ... LFHMi2ScQw

Catweazle · Post by **Catweazle** » 07 Nov 2020, 09:26

It looks to me like it was simply an over estimate of the "worst case" possibility, which has been admitted to and amended - hardly the actions of a conspiracy.

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dy ... 4621745061

The trend is still steeply upwards, which once again disproves the nonsense theory that everyone who is going to die from Covid has already done so.

Remember "you can't die twice " ?

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 07 Nov 2020, 10:19

"steeply upwards" my arse. You are just making shit up now....

Meanwhile:

The ONS confirms that daily infections are going down week on week and the rate of increase had already been slowing for several weeks

This second lockdown is unnecessary, ill-judged and disastrous.

https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/uk- ... -down-ons/

And yes, indeed, you can't die twice. Which is why TOTAL deaths, seasonally adjusted, right now, are barely above the average for the time of year.

Source: the ONS