IOM Covid removing restrictions

[TheTeapot]

20 minutes ago, Nom de plume said:

Ages of deaths

Serious underlying conditions 

Are you sure this data is not reported? There's a wealth of detail published by the ons. They definitely were breaking it down by age group on their monthly reports last year.

[Max Power]

9 minutes ago, quilp said:

What would "meaningful data" actually entail then?

Can you provide an example? 

I think a lot of the data in the media is so skewed towards Covid-19 deaths and ignores all other causes. Note that Covid statistics are from all causes if a positive test was carried out within 28 days of death. 

Here's a link to further stats to back up the previous graph...

 https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/GBR/united-kingdom/death-rate

[Nom de plume]

6 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

Are you sure this data is not reported? There's a wealth of detail published by the ons. They definitely were breaking it down by age group on their monthly reports last year.

I’m not saying that it isn’t available. 

I’m saying how hard would it be whilst they roll out their ‘next slide please’ to present it in simplistic data.

Number of daily deaths

Age bands 

Were there any serious underlying health conditions 

I personally would like to know (as do everyone I speak to except those here it seems) how many people are dying from this thing who were in good physical shape.

Its it’s 50% of all deaths I’m worried, very worried. If it’s 5% I’ll take my chances.

.... and don’t get me onto fat people, attributable diabetes & baggage allowances on aircraft! lol 

Edited January 24, 2021 by Nom de plume

[TheTeapot]

I think it's approx 10%, or certainly was on a FOI I read on the ons site around november. I can't remember the exact figures but it was like 4500 out of 45000 who died with no pre-existing conditions. You could probably find it if you wanted to

Edited January 24, 2021 by TheTeapot

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, TheTeapot said:

I think it's approx 10%, or certainly was on a FOI I read on the ons site around november. I can't remember the exact figures but it was like 4500 out of 45000 who died with no pre-existing conditions. You could probably find it if you wanted to

That's the point though, the information has to be hunted down. 

[Nom de plume]

Just now, Gladys said:

That's the point though, the information has to be hunted down. 

Thank you :0)

Christ - trying to get people to understand a viewpoint on here is as bad as trying to access Covid mortality data!

[TheTeapot]

1 minute ago, Gladys said:

That's the point though, the information has to be hunted down. 

Outdated by a few months now but this is what it took me all of 30 seconds to find (although I admit I have seen this before). Still, hardly hunting or hidden or difficult

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/covid19deathsbyageanddeathsfromcovid19only

referring to the information on here

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsinvolvingcovid19englandandwales

[Nom de plume]

3 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

Outdated by a few months now but this is what it took me all of 30 seconds to find (although I admit I have seen this before). Still, hardly hunting or hidden or difficult

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/covid19deathsbyageanddeathsfromcovid19only

referring to the information on here

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsinvolvingcovid19englandandwales

Is that portrayed through the mainstream media?

Is that presented in simplistic terms by the Government in order that the U.K. public can understand & form opinion?

You know the answer.

You still don’t seem to grasp my point - I’m pissing in the wind here.

I’ll just have to accept that there are many (here) who see nothing strange in any of this.  

Edited January 24, 2021 by Nom de plume

[TheTeapot]

Just now, Nom de plume said:

Is that portrayed through the mainstream media?

Is that presented in simplistic terms by the Government in order that the U.K. public can understand & form opinion?

You know the answer.

You still don’t seem to grasp my point - I’m pissing in the wind here.

I do get your point, but the press are useless. They are notoriously bad at picking up some detail out of context and running with it. The risk of making things really simple is that that will just happen more. And as for government messaging, well, I don't have a single good thing to say about it.

In the first lockdown the BBC had a guy from the ons on, every Tuesday. I used to watch him, because he gave a very clear run through of the published data. He was good and you could tell he had prepared well for his slot each week. I've not seen him on the telly for some time though, although I havent been watching much of the BBC.

My point though, is that a lot of statistical information is published, and in a reasonably clear way, you've just got to read it.

[thommo2010]

54 minutes ago, Nom de plume said:

Ages of deaths

Serious underlying conditions 

‘Meaning’ people could then decide for themselves how at risk they might be.

The deaths are currently reported in such a way that a 40 year old, who’s in great health but a bit of a snowflake (to use an example) has turned into a jibbering, shaking, irrational mess & is scared to send his kids to school & leave the house ... even out of lockdown.

... and that is not right.

PS - I find it quite ironic the lengths the Government have gone to in order to keep basic data away from people in order to ‘protect them’ but are happy to keep the economy afloat via taxes raised from tobacco & alcohol knowing full well the consequences to the NHS by doing so.

No talk of a hoax, a great reset or any other such bollocks.

Yes, I know ... a lone voice but I do wonder why these questions are not raised by the mainstream media. Does nobody else not find this strange?

The mainstream media quite simply love bad news anything to sell papers and with pretty much 24 hour news coverage they need to fill the slots. The media have a lot to answer after all this is done.

 

You're other point about the nhs made me also think it's ironic the phrase is save the nhs whilst shutting down business which pay towards keeping it afloat

Edited January 24, 2021 by thommo2010

[horatiotheturd]

1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

That's their problem, they're collateral, get the borders open 😂

Remember the huge majority of them if they became infected wouldn't notice, a few others might get a sniffle, a tiny percentage might end up in hospital.

We seem.to be looking at this as if everyone whingets infected has an issue.  They really don't.  Most of the people who have  been "cases" since New Year only knew because of a test, and unless anyone has heard differently I am not aware of anyone ending up in Nobles as a result.

That's 50 odd cases, no harm done

[Nom de plume]

3 minutes ago, horatiotheturd said:

Remember the huge majority of them if they became infected wouldn't notice, a few others might get a sniffle, a tiny percentage might end up in hospital.

We seem.to be looking at this as if everyone whingets infected has an issue.  They really don't.  Most of the people who have  been "cases" since New Year only knew because of a test, and unless anyone has heard differently I am not aware of anyone ending up in Nobles as a result.

That's 50 odd cases, no harm done

Psssssst.

Some of us know this ... 

Pass it on ;0)

[horatiotheturd]

1 hour ago, Max Power said:

Terrible as it is, the death rate in 2020 was 10.3 per thousand. A figure pretty much matched three times during the past twenty years. 

 https://www.statista.com/statistics/281478/death-rate-united-kingdom-uk/#:~:text=Death rate in the United Kingdom 2000-2018&text=Between 2000 and 2018 the,low of 8.7 in 2011

And nearly every year if you go back to the 80s and before, in fact its a low figure.  Lower than every year ever until as recently as 2004.

More people than that died per thousand evey year in the history of the UK until 2004,  that's not even 20 years ago.

Edited January 24, 2021 by horatiotheturd

[quilp]

Some info, questions from the public, etc...

@rachomics In part 2, a member of the public asked a question about genomic testing, Ashford denied you weren't an accredited lab and talked a lot about the advantages of using the Liverpool lab, sharing info, etc. What d'you think? Please watch... 

Edited January 24, 2021 by quilp

[Newbie]

1 hour ago, AcousticallyChallenged said:

Plus, even in your scenario, the traveller in early stages would probably still be picked up by a PCR test on day 7 or 14.

Unless, they had opted not to be tested and isolate for 21 days instead, which is something they could choose at the moment