Excess Deaths

[hughesie27]

24 minutes ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

for clarity the recent years excess deaths are a global observation so our (useless) government not particularly significant in a bigger-picture view

 

maybe you know that and have covered it in a different post - just wasn’t  clear to me from this post

 

also if you know why there are excess deaths there are a big bunch of global multi-skilled professionals currently analysing so they would be happy to hear from you (or maybe not as you could do them out a job ☹️)

 

 

Yep clear to see the same rise in deaths replicated across the globe as a result from the virus. 

And the subsequent excess deaths have been covered fairly well on this thread. Waiting times, delayed diagnoses, reluctance to visit hospital or Dr during covid as they would be covid hotspots. No need to be an expert.

[escobri]

2 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Yep clear to see the same rise in deaths replicated across the globe as a result from the virus. 

And the subsequent excess deaths have been covered fairly well on this thread. Waiting times, delayed diagnoses, reluctance to visit hospital or Dr during covid as they would be covid hotspots. No need to be an expert.

How are the poor African nations coping? Did they get vaccinated like the rich western nations? New Zealand led by Jacinda Ardern must be better off than us, she was awesome, a truly inspiring leader.

[Ray Gin]

I love how the conspiracy nuts who are absolutely determined to contradict the official health advice are trying to take a pop at others for being self appointed "health experts". 

 

 

 

[escobri]

7 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

I love how the conspiracy nuts who are absolutely determined to contradict the official health advice are trying to take a pop at others for being self appointed "health experts". 

 

 

 

Official health advice us why this thread exists 🤣

[hughesie27]

15 minutes ago, escobri said:

How are the poor African nations coping? Did they get vaccinated like the rich western nations? New Zealand led by Jacinda Ardern must be better off than us, she was awesome, a truly inspiring leader.

I dont know bud. Is their data/tracking even up to scratch to make a call? 

 

[Ray Gin]

20 minutes ago, escobri said:

How are the poor African nations coping? Did they get vaccinated like the rich western nations? New Zealand led by Jacinda Ardern must be better off than us, she was awesome, a truly inspiring leader.

 

You've got reliable data from poor African countries? 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

30 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Yep clear to see the same rise in deaths replicated across the globe as a result from the virus. 

And the subsequent excess deaths have been covered fairly well on this thread. Waiting times, delayed diagnoses, reluctance to visit hospital or Dr during covid as they would be covid hotspots. No need to be an expert.

[escobri]

3 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

You've got reliable data from poor African countries? 

Of course I don't, that's why I'm asking 🙄 

[Ray Gin]

1 minute ago, escobri said:

Of course I don't, that's why I'm asking 🙄 

 

You seem to be using it as some sort of gotcha moment that because we don't have data showing heart issues in Africa that they don't exist.

 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

48 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Yes there’s a lot of wasted talent on this forum . They really should be working for various Govt institutions or medical ones . Hefty money too . 

yeah the conspiracy nut jobs don’t quite have that level of intelligence knowledge or confidence 

 

that MP mentioned earlier in the thread is looking for an open discussion and analysis to seek answers what ever they may be

 

the googlers and link copiers somehow construe that as not wanting to discuss things as they (the conspiracy nut jobs and their feckless followers) think they know the answers already 

 

 

 

 

[Ulysses]

13 hours ago, Ked said:

 

I worry about the mass injections into our kids.

 

 

I missed this revealing nugget of truth when I was reading this thread last night.

 

In the past, the most common age at which people died was 0 - their first year of life.  Immunisation was one of the biggest causes of reduced childhood deaths and sicknesses in Britain and worldwide.

 

I'm sure you're familiar with the adjective "Dickensian".  If you'd like to see what that really means, a good way to start would be to stop childhood immunisations. 

 

Before the introduction of the diphtheria vaccine in 1940, diphtheria used to kill about 7 people - almost all of whom were children - every day in the UK.  That's around 50 a week, 2,500 a year.  Before the introduction of the measles vaccine, around 20 people a week, mainly children, died from the disease, while others were left with brain damage, hearing loss, blindness or permanent lung damage.  Tetanus used to kill about 200 people a year in the UK.  Nowadays, there are typically 1-2 deaths every 2-3 years, and 100% of deaths from tetanus are older adults who weren't vaccinated as children.

 

It's the same worldwide.  Infant and early childhood deaths have reduced enormously right across the world in the last 30 to 40 years, and a huge part of that is due to the international rollout of childhood immunisation programmes.

 

Frankly, I worry about anyone who worries about childhood immunisations, when the real alternative is illness, death and disability from diseases.

 

[Ked]

11 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

I missed this revealing nugget of truth when I was reading this thread last night.

 

In the past, the most common age at which people died was 0 - their first year of life.  Immunisation was one of the biggest causes of reduced childhood deaths and sicknesses in Britain and worldwide.

 

I'm sure you're familiar with the adjective "Dickensian".  If you'd like to see what that really means, a good way to start would be to stop childhood immunisations. 

 

Before the introduction of the diphtheria vaccine in 1940, diphtheria used to kill about 7 people - almost all of whom were children - every day in the UK.  That's around 50 a week, 2,500 a year.  Before the introduction of the measles vaccine, around 20 people a week, mainly children, died from the disease, while others were left with brain damage, hearing loss, blindness or permanent lung damage.  Tetanus used to kill about 200 people a year in the UK.  Nowadays, there are typically 1-2 deaths every 2-3 years, and 100% of deaths from tetanus are older adults who weren't vaccinated as children.

 

It's the same worldwide.  Infant and early childhood deaths have reduced enormously right across the world in the last 30 to 40 years, and a huge part of that is due to the international rollout of childhood immunisation programmes.

 

Frankly, I worry about anyone who worries about childhood immunisations, when the real alternative is illness, death and disability from diseases.

 

It's the amount in one dose.

 

[escobri]

15 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

You seem to be using it as some sort of gotcha moment that because we don't have data showing heart issues in Africa that they don't exist.

 

Sadly no Noel Edmunds moment planned, just a question.

[Ulysses]

3 hours ago, Bret the Hitman Hearts said:

 

Calling it a psyop was maybe a bit dramatic of me, but the "nudge unit" is real. It's not about mind-control - more like subtly influencing people's behaviour. 

 

There is a logic to influencing people's behaviour rather than lecturing them to do something differently. Companies recognise that in their advertising strategies, and governments recognise it in their promotion strategies - particularly in the health area where people are very reluctant to make lifestyle changes.

 

All that means is that companies and government agencies are both a bit cynical in the way they use marketing tactics and strategies. I wouldn't trust them for it, but I can see why they do it.  If a bit of psychological marketing trickery gets a percentage of the population to lose a few kg or give up the smokes, I'm not sure if that's a bad thing.

 

On the other hand, the "nudge unit" title seems to be a uniquely British thing.  We might have similar things here, but if we do we don't give them patronising nicknames like that.

 

I'll tell you this, though.  No-one had to coerce or psyop me into taking a Covid-19 shot.  From a very early stage in the emergence of this virus it was clear that it was significantly more dangerous than the normal winter flu bugs.  It was also clear that the kind of restrictions needed to keep the disease in check were simply impossible for societies to sustain.  That means that almost as soon as people started to die in places like Britain and Ireland we knew that the only real way we could get back to normal was to roll out a vaccine.

 

Covid-19 reminds me of the Millennium Bug, only with stronger feelings and more disinformation.  We were all told that computers were probably going to **** up at midnight on NYE 1999, unless we fixed the 2-digit date problem.  Otherwise, computers would go haywire when the calendar went from 31/12/99 to 01/01/00.  Systems would fail.  Aircraft could fall out of the sky or crash into each other because ATC systems would stop working. An almost endless list of systems that could collapse dangerously was produced. However, if we updated all the systems using 2-digit years in their dates with 4-digit years, we could avoid that.  So we did. Countless millions were spent editing and changing systems.  And lo and behold, nothing happened on the big day.  Everything worked fine.  And then people asked what the hell all the fuss was about, and why we'd wasted all that money on those IT systems.

 

This is Covid-19's Millennium Bug moment. A vaccine was developed, and it worked, and that's what stopped all the restriction shite and let people get back to a normal life.  So now people are getting complacent and are asking what the fuss was, and why we had all those unnecessary restrictions, and why we spent all that money and time on a vaccine.  They have the luxury of asking these questions and engaging in that speculation. The people who had to make all those decisions during the pandemic didn't have that luxury. They were confronted with stark options that had real and possibly awful consequences, and they made the best choices they could in the circumstances.  In the UK's case that was compromised by the shitshow of a government you happened to have in office, but that doesn't take away from the difficulty or the complexity of the issues that faced governments and health systems across the world.

 

 

[Ulysses]

33 minutes ago, Ked said:

It's the amount in one dose.

 

 

The amount of what, in one dose of what?  Where?  When?

[Cade]

The problem is that because childhood vaccinations have been so hugely effective, people think that they're not needed because nobody is getting seriously sick or dying from the various diseases that had historically killed children in their millions.

 

Measles, mumps, rubella, polio, smallpox, rotavirus, diphtheria, hepatitis b, tetanus, whooping cough, meningitis, pneumonia, hpv and many others have been controlled by 70 years of mass vaccination programmes.

 

Some of them are making a comeback because people are feckin stupid and don't get their kids vaccinated.

[Ulysses]

2 minutes ago, Cade said:

The problem is that because childhood vaccinations have been so hugely effective, people think that they're not needed because nobody is getting seriously sick or dying from the various diseases that had historically killed children in their millions.

 

Measles, mumps, rubella, polio, smallpox, rotavirus, diphtheria, hepatitis b, tetanus, whooping cough, meningitis, pneumonia, hpv and many others have been controlled by 70 years of mass vaccination programmes.

 

Some of them are making a comeback because people are feckin stupid and don't get their kids vaccinated.

 

That's it, in a ****ing nutshell.

[Tazio]

6 minutes ago, Cade said:

The problem is that because childhood vaccinations have been so hugely effective, people think that they're not needed because nobody is getting seriously sick or dying from the various diseases that had historically killed children in their millions.

 

Measles, mumps, rubella, polio, smallpox, rotavirus, diphtheria, hepatitis b, tetanus, whooping cough, meningitis, pneumonia, hpv and many others have been controlled by 70 years of mass vaccination programmes.

 

Some of them are making a comeback because people are feckin stupid and don't get their kids vaccinated.

There was a well publicised case a few years ago. When a French anti vax couple went on holiday to Costa Rica that was measles free due to a stringent vaccination program and one of their kids had measles. 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/measles-costa-rica-french-tourist-boy-anti-vax-vaccination-who-global-health-threat-infection-mmr-a8794256.html

[Dawnrazor]

28 minutes ago, Cade said:

The problem is that because childhood vaccinations have been so hugely effective, people think that they're not needed because nobody is getting seriously sick or dying from the various diseases that had historically killed children in their millions.

 

Measles, mumps, rubella, polio, smallpox, rotavirus, diphtheria, hepatitis b, tetanus, whooping cough, meningitis, pneumonia, hpv and many others have been controlled by 70 years of mass vaccination programmes.

 

Some of them are making a comeback because people are feckin stupid and don't get their kids vaccinated.

Pretty much exactly, we got our son all his vaccinations, why wouldn't we considering the success of them.

[Ray Gin]

49 minutes ago, Cade said:

The problem is that because childhood vaccinations have been so hugely effective, people think that they're not needed because nobody is getting seriously sick or dying from the various diseases that had historically killed children in their millions.

 

Measles, mumps, rubella, polio, smallpox, rotavirus, diphtheria, hepatitis b, tetanus, whooping cough, meningitis, pneumonia, hpv and many others have been controlled by 70 years of mass vaccination programmes.

 

Some of them are making a comeback because people are feckin stupid and don't get their kids vaccinated.

 

 

[Taffin]

4 hours ago, Ray Gin said:

 

A combination of costs plus a lower necessity to get a rampant virus under control now that numbers aren't as prevalent and our health service isn't on its knees to the same extent.

 

 

Why are costs important now though? Why isn't as prevalent given most people's vaccination will now be worthless due to time passed (the narrative at the time)?

 

Or did the virus change?

 

 

4 hours ago, Spellczech said:

Nobody knew at the time. I'm sure it was hoped that the vaccines might reduce transmission, but the main purpose was to help people not die. It was months before people realised that other than the old and weak many of the younger people being hospitalised were fatties, but importantly by no means all. I know one person who died of Covid and he had other health problems. I also know just one who was hospitalised and she was not even overweight (but she was unvaccinated)...

 

It was months prior to the vaccine that became clear though. Seems an awful lot of money to spend knowing full well most people didn't need it?

 

Sorry to hear of the person who passed.

 

4 hours ago, Spellczech said:

 

I remember writing on here that it is a pretty stupid virus which kills its host. A virus does not want to kill its host because it then cannot spread. Natural biological behaviour is that more virulent viruses end up wiping themselves out and milder strains prosper. Mutations occur though and sometimes the nasty strains will develop again which is why we need vaccines to see us through...

 

Totally agree. I'm not anti-vax. I was just anti-global vax and coercion. Flu jab? Wonderful thing. Would I be taking it? No, I've no need to.

 

4 hours ago, ri Alban said:

It's now like the flu. It can kill vulnerable people,  unlike when pre vaccine,  if fecked up every *****, given half the chance. And with muppets walking about, it was given this chance. 

 

Did it feck. In the grand scheme of things it fecked up hardly anyone who was infected.

Edited January 6 by Taffin
Write years in error rather than months

[Ulysses]

5 hours ago, Spellczech said:

I remember writing on here that it is a pretty stupid virus which kills its host. A virus does not want to kill its host because it then cannot spread. Natural biological behaviour is that more virulent viruses end up wiping themselves out and milder strains prosper. Mutations occur though and sometimes the nasty strains will develop again which is why we need vaccines to see us through...

 

The logic makes sense, but there are two details that have to be kept in mind when applying the logic.

 

The first detail is that viruses are in fact stupid. They quite literally have no capacity for thinking, so they've no idea whether they're killing their hosts or not. They don't even have a concept of life, let alone death.  A more practical viewpoint is that viruses have a method of propagating and reproducing.  That method causes physical effects in their hosts that we would recognise as illness.  How severe that illness is depends, pardon the pun, on a host of factors.  Sometimes, the degree of illness might lead to death in the host - but that's not something the virus seeks to do or even comprehends. As long as the death rate in hosts is low enough, that'll have no effect on virus reproduction. But if the death rate is high, that will interrupt virus reproduction.  Over time, viruses that cause a lot of host deaths will reproduce less often than viruses that cause illness and fewer deaths, and eventually they'll become dominant in the virus population.

 

But that's where the second detail comes in. Viruses can adapt and evolve quite quickly - but if the death rate in hosts is very high for hosts while not being all that bad for virus reproduction, that process can take a very long time, and of course if the death rate in hosts doesn't really prevent virus reproduction the virus might hardly evolve at all.  That's the real reason humans need vaccines.

 

Think of it this way.  The human population is growing at around 0.91% a year.  If a new virus appeared that killed 0.5% of the population every year there would still be an endless supply of human hosts, and that virus might cheerfully carry on reproducing without interruption.  Meanwhile, humanity would be looking at an extra 40 million deaths every year, which a lot of people would regard as catastrophic.

 

In fact, that's pretty much how things like measles and diphtheria were so successful over a period of millennia.  Have a look at some of the figures out there for how many people used to be killed by infectious diseases, but all the while the human population didn't shrink.  It was a pretty good arrangement from a purely evolutionary point of view - but it meant there were a lot of dead people, not least children.  Humans figured out how to get the edge over those viruses, and that was one of the greatest scientific achievements in history.

[Spellczech]

3 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

The logic makes sense, but there are two details that have to be kept in mind when applying the logic.

 

The first detail is that viruses are in fact stupid. They quite literally have no capacity for thinking, so they've no idea whether they're killing their hosts or not. They don't even have a concept of life, let alone death.  A more practical viewpoint is that viruses have a method of propagating and reproducing.  That method causes physical effects in their hosts that we would recognise as illness.  How severe that illness is depends, pardon the pun, on a host of factors.  Sometimes, the degree of illness might lead to death in the host - but that's not something the virus seeks to do or even comprehends. As long as the death rate in hosts is low enough, that'll have no effect on virus reproduction. But if the death rate is high, that will interrupt virus reproduction.  Over time, viruses that cause a lot of host deaths will reproduce less often than viruses that cause illness and fewer deaths, and eventually they'll become dominant in the virus population.

 

But that's where the second detail comes in. Viruses can adapt and evolve quite quickly - but if the death rate in hosts is very high for hosts while not being all that bad for virus reproduction, that process can take a very long time, and of course if the death rate in hosts doesn't really prevent virus reproduction the virus might hardly evolve at all.  That's the real reason humans need vaccines.

 

Think of it this way.  The human population is growing at around 0.91% a year.  If a new virus appeared that killed 0.5% of the population every year there would still be an endless supply of human hosts, and that virus might cheerfully carry on reproducing without interruption.  Meanwhile, humanity would be looking at an extra 40 million deaths every year, which a lot of people would regard as catastrophic.

 

In fact, that's pretty much how things like measles and diphtheria were so successful over a period of millennia.  Have a look at some of the figures out there for how many people used to be killed by infectious diseases, but all the while the human population didn't shrink.  It was a pretty good arrangement from a purely evolutionary point of view - but it meant there were a lot of dead people, not least children.  Humans figured out how to get the edge over those viruses, and that was one of the greatest scientific achievements in history.

Sorry I was not meaning to imply that viruses are sentient! Haha Just trying to write it in a simple way...

[i wish jj was my dad]

Can we put all of the great conspiracy/experiment stuff to bed now?

Lockdown, vaccines and other preventative measures were necessary to avoid health systems breaking down and many, many more people dying. 

Those inconvenienced us all and had a seriously negative impact on a lot of people. But then many lives were lost to the virus and not all of those victims were near end of life beforehand. 

Yes, the arseholes in charge made mistakes. Some were obvious, some were stupid and some were unpardonable but there never was any great conspiracy. 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

1 hour ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

Can we put all of the great conspiracy/experiment stuff to bed now?

Lockdown, vaccines and other preventative measures were necessary to avoid health systems breaking down and many, many more people dying. 

Those inconvenienced us all and had a seriously negative impact on a lot of people. But then many lives were lost to the virus and not all of those victims were near end of life beforehand. 

Yes, the arseholes in charge made mistakes. Some were obvious, some were stupid and some were unpardonable but there never was any great conspiracy. 

I’m sure I read a conspiracy nut job say that the average age of a covid death was 82 - any death being sad of course and with 82 being the average it’s likely that as you say some of the deaths were younger than 82 (assuming 82 is correct in the first place)

 

any idea how many were younger and how it compares to the distribution of younger deaths in these excesses now ? Which we now at leat appear to be acknowledging (as a poster said earlier)

 

reason I ask is that during the pandemic another conspiracy nut job or maybe it was a not-the-science scientist was trying to raise a discussion on whether rather than counting numbers of lives lost maybe expected years of life lost would be a better measure when making decisions

 

eg lockdown etc saves another 4 years of life for granny but the negative affects of lockdown etc subsequently causes mum to lose 30 years - obviously both being equally sad on a certain level

 

so before we put it all to bed as you suggest do we know or think it’s in anyway relevant whether lots of younger folk losing decades of life can be quantified against the numbers of older losing a few years

 

as you say massive decisions for those in charge (arseholes or not) although Matt Hancock in between breaking restrictions (surprised he didn’t actually die taking such a risk) to feel that lady’s ass and “scaring the pants off the public” seemed to be keen to make decisions on who should be saved and who should die - his one dimensional ‘thinking’ was in the midst of the pandemic tho so he probably hadn’t thought far enough ahead to analyse save granny or mum - more granny 1 vs granny 2 for that midwit

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ulysses]

1 hour ago, Spellczech said:

Sorry I was not meaning to imply that viruses are sentient! Haha Just trying to write it in a simple way...

 

I know you knew that.  I'm just thinking of others reading the thread.

[Bret the Hitman Hearts]

6 hours ago, Tazio said:

There was a well publicised case a few years ago. When a French anti vax couple went on holiday to Costa Rica that was measles free due to a stringent vaccination program and one of their kids had measles. 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/measles-costa-rica-french-tourist-boy-anti-vax-vaccination-who-global-health-threat-infection-mmr-a8794256.html

 

but if everyone in Costa Rica had had their measles vaccine, what's the problem?

 

 

9 hours ago, ri Alban said:

The vaccine stopped folk getting hospitalised and dying. It can't stop transmission,  only isolation stops transmission. 

 

That's not what we were told at the time. Then the backpeddling began.

Edited January 6 by Bret the Hitman Hearts

[Victorian]

7 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

There is a logic to influencing people's behaviour rather than lecturing them to do something differently. Companies recognise that in their advertising strategies, and governments recognise it in their promotion strategies - particularly in the health area where people are very reluctant to make lifestyle changes.

 

All that means is that companies and government agencies are both a bit cynical in the way they use marketing tactics and strategies. I wouldn't trust them for it, but I can see why they do it.  If a bit of psychological marketing trickery gets a percentage of the population to lose a few kg or give up the smokes, I'm not sure if that's a bad thing.

 

On the other hand, the "nudge unit" title seems to be a uniquely British thing.  We might have similar things here, but if we do we don't give them patronising nicknames like that.

 

I'll tell you this, though.  No-one had to coerce or psyop me into taking a Covid-19 shot.  From a very early stage in the emergence of this virus it was clear that it was significantly more dangerous than the normal winter flu bugs.  It was also clear that the kind of restrictions needed to keep the disease in check were simply impossible for societies to sustain.  That means that almost as soon as people started to die in places like Britain and Ireland we knew that the only real way we could get back to normal was to roll out a vaccine.

 

Covid-19 reminds me of the Millennium Bug, only with stronger feelings and more disinformation.  We were all told that computers were probably going to **** up at midnight on NYE 1999, unless we fixed the 2-digit date problem.  Otherwise, computers would go haywire when the calendar went from 31/12/99 to 01/01/00.  Systems would fail.  Aircraft could fall out of the sky or crash into each other because ATC systems would stop working. An almost endless list of systems that could collapse dangerously was produced. However, if we updated all the systems using 2-digit years in their dates with 4-digit years, we could avoid that.  So we did. Countless millions were spent editing and changing systems.  And lo and behold, nothing happened on the big day.  Everything worked fine.  And then people asked what the hell all the fuss was about, and why we'd wasted all that money on those IT systems.

 

This is Covid-19's Millennium Bug moment. A vaccine was developed, and it worked, and that's what stopped all the restriction shite and let people get back to a normal life.  So now people are getting complacent and are asking what the fuss was, and why we had all those unnecessary restrictions, and why we spent all that money and time on a vaccine.  They have the luxury of asking these questions and engaging in that speculation. The people who had to make all those decisions during the pandemic didn't have that luxury. They were confronted with stark options that had real and possibly awful consequences, and they made the best choices they could in the circumstances.  In the UK's case that was compromised by the shitshow of a government you happened to have in office, but that doesn't take away from the difficulty or the complexity of the issues that faced governments and health systems across the world.

 

 

 

I no longer have the patience,  energy,  will,  inclination to engage in this argument and all of the unmitigated insanity contained within.  But I would like to endorse this excellent summary as pretty much the nailed down truth of the matter.  

 

History was always destined to be rewritten regarding the pandemic.  People could produce posts of this quality in their tens of thousands but it wont change many minds.  You really just have to let people believe what they want to believe.  

 

Great post though.

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

56 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

I no longer have the patience,  energy,  will,  inclination to engage in this argument and all of the unmitigated insanity contained within.  But I would like to endorse this excellent summary as pretty much the nailed down truth of the matter.  

 

History was always destined to be rewritten regarding the pandemic.  People could produce posts of this quality in their tens of thousands but it wont change many minds.  You really just have to let people believe what they want to believe.  

 

Great post though.

although in just a couple of sentences on this very page @Taffin has driven a coach and horses right through it

 

 

 

[i wish jj was my dad]

4 hours ago, MoncurMacdonaldMercer said:

I’m sure I read a conspiracy nut job say that the average age of a covid death was 82 - any death being sad of course and with 82 being the average it’s likely that as you say some of the deaths were younger than 82 (assuming 82 is correct in the first place)

 

any idea how many were younger and how it compares to the distribution of younger deaths in these excesses now ? Which we now at leat appear to be acknowledging (as a poster said earlier)

 

reason I ask is that during the pandemic another conspiracy nut job or maybe it was a not-the-science scientist was trying to raise a discussion on whether rather than counting numbers of lives lost maybe expected years of life lost would be a better measure when making decisions

 

eg lockdown etc saves another 4 years of life for granny but the negative affects of lockdown etc subsequently causes mum to lose 30 years - obviously both being equally sad on a certain level

 

so before we put it all to bed as you suggest do we know or think it’s in anyway relevant whether lots of younger folk losing decades of life can be quantified against the numbers of older losing a few years

 

as you say massive decisions for those in charge (arseholes or not) although Matt Hancock in between breaking restrictions (surprised he didn’t actually die taking such a risk) to feel that lady’s ass and “scaring the pants off the public” seemed to be keen to make decisions on who should be saved and who should die - his one dimensional ‘thinking’ was in the midst of the pandemic tho so he probably hadn’t thought far enough ahead to analyse save granny or mum - more granny 1 vs granny 2 for that midwit

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Politicians being politicians tend to think in the short term so were focused on the immediate threat and in this instance I kinda understand that. While I don't have a lot of time or respect for most politicians I wouldn't want to be standing up and defending a decision that sacrificed x number of lives in 2020 because those lives were less important than younger/healthier/ wealthier people who have a longer and better quality of life ahead of them than an 82 year old granny or a skint drunk chain smoker with a host of consequential  health issues. 

Of course there were wrong calls, honest mistakes, eff ups and outright corruption but I'm not buying conspiracy or premeditated control. 

[MoncurMacdonaldMercer]

3 minutes ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

Politicians being politicians tend to think in the short term so were focused on the immediate threat and in this instance I kinda understand that. While I don't have a lot of time or respect for most politicians I wouldn't want to be standing up and defending a decision that sacrificed x number of lives in 2020 because those lives were less important than younger/healthier/ wealthier people who have a longer and better quality of life ahead of them than an 82 year old granny or a skint drunk chain smoker with a host of consequential  health issues. 

Of course there were wrong calls, honest mistakes, eff ups and outright corruption but I'm not buying conspiracy or premeditated control. 

 

😃👍

[Ulysses]

 

1 hour ago, Victorian said:

 

I no longer have the patience,  energy,  will,  inclination to engage in this argument and all of the unmitigated insanity contained within.  But I would like to endorse this excellent summary as pretty much the nailed down truth of the matter.  

 

History was always destined to be rewritten regarding the pandemic.  People could produce posts of this quality in their tens of thousands but it wont change many minds.  You really just have to let people believe what they want to believe.  

 

Great post though.

 

People have to believe in something, and a lot of quasi-scientific mumbo jumbo has become their faith of choice now that religion has become so disused.  You'd wonder what's really troubling them sometimes. Presumably this thread is a rehash of the positions taken by the same people when the original Covid thread was on the go.

[Ulysses]

30 minutes ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

Politicians being politicians tend to think in the short term so were focused on the immediate threat and in this instance I kinda understand that. While I don't have a lot of time or respect for most politicians I wouldn't want to be standing up and defending a decision that sacrificed x number of lives in 2020 because those lives were less important than younger/healthier/ wealthier people who have a longer and better quality of life ahead of them than an 82 year old granny or a skint drunk chain smoker with a host of consequential  health issues. 

Of course there were wrong calls, honest mistakes, eff ups and outright corruption but I'm not buying conspiracy or premeditated control. 

 

If politicians had "let it rip", the very same people who waffle on here about the stupidity of the restrictions would have been first in line to chase the same politicians with torches and pitchforks for letting their mammies and grannies die.

 

It also pisses me off to see people dismiss those who died as either old people, smokers or fatties.  I worked in an area where some of my people had to work on site or in the office during the pandemic.  I had to bend the rules so that one of my staff would work from home regardless, because she was barely a few months out of chemotherapy and had a dangerously compromised immune system.  She was neither a smoker nor overweight, and she was in her late 40s.  I have two relatives and two pals who even now have compromised immune systems from cancer treatments.

 

They're not conservative edgelords.  They're just wankers.   

[i wish jj was my dad]

6 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

If politicians had "let it rip", the very same people who waffle on here about the stupidity of the restrictions would have been first in line to chase the same politicians with torches and pitchforks for letting their mammies and grannies die.

 

It also pisses me off to see people dismiss those who died as either old people, smokers or fatties.  I worked in an area where some of my people had to work on site or in the office during the pandemic.  I had to bend the rules so that one of my staff would work from home regardless, because she was barely a few months out of chemotherapy and had a dangerously compromised immune system.  She was neither a smoker nor overweight, and she was in her late 40s.  I have two relatives and two pals who even now have compromised immune systems from cancer treatments.

 

They're not conservative edgelords.  They're just wankers.   

We're on the same page.  Covid was horrible and as much as I'm not prone to defending politicians and we were blessed with the worst in living memory in charge in a number of countries - not just in the Uk - they had to make what they thought were the least bad decisions. 

It fecked up my own life quite considerably and I was aghast at the stupidity of some decisions but most reasonably balanced individuals managed to grasp the implications of allowing our libertarians and free thinkers to just keep calm and carry on as Trump and his acolytes wanted. 

[Bret the Hitman Hearts]

Anyone else mind the time the "safe and effective" Astra Zeneca vaccine (which was initially offered to people of all ages before being limited to over 40s due to safety concerns) killed people before being quietly withdrawn?

 

Or how about the time it became apparent that the two MRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) were causing heart problems, mainly in young males?

 

 

[Ulysses]

1 minute ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

We're on the same page.  Covid was horrible and as much as I'm not prone to defending politicians and we were blessed with the worst in living memory in charge in a number of countries - not just in the Uk - they had to make what they thought were the least bad decisions. 

It fecked up my own life quite considerably and I was aghast at the stupidity of some decisions but most reasonably balanced individuals managed to grasp the implications of allowing our libertarians and free thinkers to just keep calm and carry on as Trump and his acolytes wanted. 

 

By the way, I have no doubt that if a similar pandemic happened again the officials and politicians would not do things in quite the same way, and should not do things the same way, because hopefully they'd have learned something from experience.  And people should be critical of government institutions for the way they handle crises - whether they handle them well or badly, you want them to do it better.  But it's another thing entirely just to go off on a rant about conspiracies and control.  In most modern democracies politicians don't make decisions based on a desire to control; they make them based on a desire to not piss off the public and hopefully get themselves re-elected.  That might not make for great decision-makers, but it also makes for pretty crap controllers.  It also doesn't help the debate in places like here that the two biggest English-speaking countries in the world were both led by incompetent fools during the pandemic, and that automatically alienated loads of people.

[i wish jj was my dad]

6 minutes ago, Bret the Hitman Hearts said:

Anyone else mind the time the "safe and effective" Astra Zeneca vaccine (which was initially offered to people of all ages before being limited to over 40s due to safety concerns) killed people before being quietly withdrawn?

 

Or how about the time it became apparent that the two MRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) were causing heart problems, mainly in young males?

 

 

I don't as it happens but that will most likely be my own ignorance so I'd be interested to read an authoritative assessment from medical professionals. Any links you can share? 

[Ulysses]

8 minutes ago, Bret the Hitman Hearts said:

Anyone else mind the time the "safe and effective" Astra Zeneca vaccine (which was initially offered to people of all ages before being limited to over 40s due to safety concerns) killed people before being quietly withdrawn?

 

Or how about the time it became apparent that the two MRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) were causing heart problems, mainly in young males?

 

 

 

Yes, although you've simplified the stories a bit.  Why?

[i wish jj was my dad]

1 minute ago, Ulysses said:

 

By the way, I have no doubt that if a similar pandemic happened again the officials and politicians would not do things in quite the same way, and should not do things the same way, because hopefully they'd have learned something from experience.  And people should be critical of government institutions for the way they handle crises - whether they handle them well or badly, you want them to do it better.  But it's another thing entirely just to go off on a rant about conspiracies and control.  In most modern democracies politicians don't make decisions based on a desire to control; they make them based on a desire to not piss off the public and hopefully get themselves re-elected.  That might not make for great decision-makers, but it also makes for pretty crap controllers.  It also doesn't help the debate in places like here that the two biggest English-speaking countries in the world were both led by incompetent fools during the pandemic, and that automatically alienated loads of people.

I've probably made most of these points myself across a number of posts on this thread 👍  

In the past the world looked up to the US and UK but since the financial crash both countries have been taken over by populism and outright arseholery. 

And yes, even Johnson, Sturgeon, Drakeford and Foster were savvy enough to know how unpopular and damaging restrictions were but recognise the consequences of the alternative. 

Despite my contempt for politicians, the apparatus of government still managed to function (if not well) in the UK but we still have competent and professional officials who were serious about trying to protect the population. 

[Bret the Hitman Hearts]

8 minutes ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

I don't as it happens but that will most likely be my own ignorance so I'd be interested to read an authoritative assessment from medical professionals. Any links you can share? 

 

 

Astra Zeneca deaths (link to office of national statistics is within the article, but I gave the article for context)

 

MRNA heart problems, article here for context

 

You can also Google either of these topics and there are plenty of articles about them. I vividly remember a family member going back for her second pfizer jag - and they'd added in a warning about heart problems since she got the first one. Certainly filled us all with confidence at the time...

 

 

6 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Yes, although you've simplified the stories a bit.  Why?

 

I just fancied seeing the reactions of the "toe the official line" crew with regards to two of the more egregious covid elephants in the room. (on that note, I'm still waiting for an explanation regarding what happened to flu in 2020)

 

Basically I'm bitter about what we went through in 2021 and this thread is bringing a lot of it back.

[Ulysses]

9 minutes ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

I don't as it happens but that will most likely be my own ignorance so I'd be interested to read an authoritative assessment from medical professionals. Any links you can share? 

 

Here you go.

 

Myocarditis, Pericarditis and Cardiomyopathy After COVID-19 Vaccination - PMC (nih.gov)

 

Key finding: There are some groups where there is a very small increase in the risk of certain conditions following Covid-19 vaccination, but the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks.

 

This report found different rates of these conditions in people following vaccination, but incidences were low - e.g. 13.5 per million doses in Australia, 5.0 per million doses in the UK.   This happened with the AstraZeneca vaccine as well as the mRNA vaccines.

 

Covid-19 itself causes the same heart inflammation conditions.  Here's a report from the US which shows that having Covid-19 multiplied the risk of myocarditis by a factor of 16.

 

Association Between COVID-19 and Myocarditis Using Hospital-Based Administrative Data — United States, March 2020–January 2021 | MMWR (cdc.gov)

 

 

[Ulysses]

4 minutes ago, Bret the Hitman Hearts said:

 

 

Astra Zeneca deaths (link to office of national statistics is within the article, but I gave the article for context)

 

MRNA heart problems, article here for context

 

You can also Google either of these topics and there are plenty of articles about them. I vividly remember a family member going back for her second pfizer jag - and they'd added in a warning about heart problems since she got the first one. Certainly filled us all with confidence at the time...

 

 

 

I just fancied seeing the reactions of the "toe the official line" crew with regards to two of the more egregious covid elephants in the room. (on that note, I'm still waiting for an explanation regarding what happened to flu in 2020)

 

Basically I'm bitter about what we went through in 2021 and this thread is bringing a lot of it back.

 

I'm not sure bitterness is the best way to respond, TBH.  It'll only increase your cortisol levels, and it won't change the past.

 

Have a look at the two links I posted in reply to @i wish jj was my dad.  The net point - though I'm wary of oversimplifying - is that there is some increase in certain heart inflammation conditions arising from Covid-19 vaccines.  But it is very small, and there is a much bigger increase in those conditions in people who've had serious or severe Covid-19.  Therefore on balance - and comfortably on balance - vaccination is very, very much the safer option, even for young males.

 

Oddly enough, I didn't follow the stuff around AstraZeneca's vaccine quite as closely.  It featured a little in Ireland's rollout, but the mRNA vaccines were the main ones in our programme.  My local GP practice receptionist got it, while everyone else on the staff got Pfizer or Moderna.  She joked with me that "I got that Dutch Gold, while everyone else got the good stuff".   

 

I know AstraZeneca featured heavily in the UK's early rollout.  Did the UK drop it?

 

 

 

 

[i wish jj was my dad]

8 minutes ago, Bret the Hitman Hearts said:

 

 

Astra Zeneca deaths (link to office of national statistics is within the article, but I gave the article for context)

 

MRNA heart problems, article here for context

 

You can also Google either of these topics and there are plenty of articles about them. I vividly remember a family member going back for her second pfizer jag - and they'd added in a warning about heart problems since she got the first one. Certainly filled us all with confidence at the time...

 

 

 

I just fancied seeing the reactions of the "toe the official line" crew with regards to two of the more egregious covid elephants in the room. (on that note, I'm still waiting for an explanation regarding what happened to flu in 2020)

 

Basically I'm bitter about what we went through in 2021 and this thread is bringing a lot of it back.

Thanks👍. I'll read properly in the morning and let you know what I think.

FWIW, I'm not toeing any line. I know we were let down by our political masters and my own life was badly effected by covid but I'm inclined to take a balanced view that takes account of a bigger picture .

I can forgive mistakes, even stupid mistakes providing they were made in good faith and supported by evidence and risk assessments.  I'm still naive enough to believe that's how governments work in the UK. 

[Ked]

I've took a doing on here which is fair enough.

To answer the 44%  question that was cdc figures .

Thise figures in no way are equated with vaccination.

They still hold true as excess deaths for the age group in comparison .

I think.the highest as a whole was 15%.

 

 

 

[periodictabledancer]

4 hours ago, Bret the Hitman Hearts said:

 

I just fancied seeing the reactions of the "toe the official line" crew with regards to two of the more egregious covid elephants in the room. (on that note, I'm still waiting for an explanation regarding what happened to flu in 2020)

 

Basically I'm bitter about what we went through in 2021 and this thread is bringing a lot of it back.

That'll be the reason for your sensationalist post about the Astra Zeneca vaccine  then. 

I get it now. 

[The Mighty Thor]

Many heads were buckled during the covid pandemic.

 

Reading through this it appears many heads are still buckled.

 

Keep bleaching those messages you crazy cats 👍

[Costanza]

Another covid thread and talk of 'experimental' vaccines and excess deaths but no mention of Long Covid and the thousands upon thousands of people (including children) whose lives have been ruined by covid.

I've never understood this desire to portray the vaccine as more dangerous than the virus in the face of all available evidence.

[XB52]

Been a while since a good covid conspiracy thread. 

[Bret the Hitman Hearts]

8 hours ago, i wish jj was my dad said:

Thanks👍. I'll read properly in the morning and let you know what I think.

FWIW, I'm not toeing any line. I know we were let down by our political masters and my own life was badly effected by covid but I'm inclined to take a balanced view that takes account of a bigger picture .

I can forgive mistakes, even stupid mistakes providing they were made in good faith and supported by evidence and risk assessments.  I'm still naive enough to believe that's how governments work in the UK. 

 

Sorry - I didn't necessarily mean you. I just get amused by how it's (still) possible to come onto a forum, state a fact like "the Astra Zeneca vaccine killed people" and people still immediately jump on it as a "conspiracy theory".

 

Like this:
 

4 hours ago, periodictabledancer said:

That'll be the reason for your sensationalist post about the Astra Zeneca vaccine  then. 

I get it now. 

 

 

8 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

I'm not sure bitterness is the best way to respond, TBH.  It'll only increase your cortisol levels, and it won't change the past.

 

Have a look at the two links I posted in reply to @i wish jj was my dad.  The net point - though I'm wary of oversimplifying - is that there is some increase in certain heart inflammation conditions arising from Covid-19 vaccines.  But it is very small, and there is a much bigger increase in those conditions in people who've had serious or severe Covid-19.  Therefore on balance - and comfortably on balance - vaccination is very, very much the safer option, even for young males.

 

Oddly enough, I didn't follow the stuff around AstraZeneca's vaccine quite as closely.  It featured a little in Ireland's rollout, but the mRNA vaccines were the main ones in our programme.  My local GP practice receptionist got it, while everyone else on the staff got Pfizer or Moderna.  She joked with me that "I got that Dutch Gold, while everyone else got the good stuff".   

 

I know AstraZeneca featured heavily in the UK's early rollout.  Did the UK drop it?

 

I don't disagree with anything you've said there. I just remain a bit bitter that it's apparent that these vaccines were rushed through - understandably so, given the situation we were in. But no one can tell me that they weren't rushed - otherwise the side-effects would have come to light earlier, rather than during the actual rollout. Off the top of my head, I remember a lot of debate around what age groups it actually made sense to vaccinate. America was jabbing infants while we never did here - so there wasn't exactly consensus across the board. I'm suspicious of the desire to vaccinate everyone multiple times - especially in America, due to the fact that it's a profit-making exercise over there. That argument doesn't really apply here, thankfully.

 

You're right though - I should probably try to move on since it's all in the past now 😅

 

Btw, since you asked, they dropped the Astra Zeneca vaccine later on, with the official explanation that the MRNA ones were more effective but I always had my personal suspicions that they just quietly shelved it due to the blood clot issues. I remember during the rollout when the time came for my age group to get vaccinated, no one wanted "the blood clots one" - which again, didn't exactly fill me with confidence!

Edited January 7 by Bret the Hitman Hearts

[Jeffros Furios]