Covid 19 outbreak - arguing about Stats (again)

[bigjim]

You are trusting the government's assertions. I do have evidence of the mis recording. I'm not speaking from ignorance. My son is a nurse and my daughter is a doctor.

[roubaixtuesday]

You are trusting the government's assertions. I do have evidence of the mis recording. I'm not speaking from ignorance. My son is a nurse and my daughter is a doctor.

I am not trusting government assertions. I am trusting the weight of overall evidence.

You present no evidence whatever.

[bigjim]

Neither do you.

[roubaixtuesday]

Neither do you.

Well, I thought it wad already well known, but especially for you:

Official statistics, world renouned science and group of scientists independent of government follow.

The ONS https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... nddiseases

Imperial College Research Group.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-i ... 9-reports/

Independent Sage group of scientists
https://www.independentsage.org/

I could go on, and on, and on.

Over to you for reputably sourced alternative explanations.

[The utility cyclist]

150 deaths a day even after months of lockdown is not a threat to public health? We must have different definitions of a health threat!

it's less than last years average daily just in England and Wales, 71,000 respiratory deaths as underlying cause (unlike the deaths described by the government which aren't), and that in a 'good' flu year
The 40,000+ deaths are not FROM a virus, they are in the vast majority deaths mostly by other underlying ailments, the register of deaths proves this.

The definition of a health threat has radically changed, the reaction itself has clearly has killed more (by removing healthcare everywhere and making people fearful to even go to hospital, locking down has put the future of all our lives in jeopardy, that people are dying from their existing health conditions by the tens of thousands more than in any other year but respiratory deaths have been lower than for at least the last 5 years tells us something is massively wrong by locking down and that the so called pandemic is not a pandemic at all, otherwise how can so many fewer deaths actually have occurred from respiratory disease if that were the case?

[bigjim]

Neither do you.

Well, I thought it wad already well known, but especially for you:

Official statistics, world renouned science and group of scientists independent of government follow.

The ONS https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... nddiseases

Imperial College Research Group.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-i ... 9-reports/

Independent Sage group of scientists
https://www.independentsage.org/

I could go on, and on, and on.

Over to you for reputably sourced alternative explanations.

You are going on and on. All those you mention have all been discredited and all are subject to government influence. I just talk to doctors and nurses who dare not speak out. I've worked with the UK government for years and am well aware of statistics supplied to the media.

[roubaixtuesday]

Neither do you.

Well, I thought it wad already well known, but especially for you:

Official statistics, world renouned science and group of scientists independent of government follow.

The ONS https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... nddiseases

Imperial College Research Group.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-i ... 9-reports/

Independent Sage group of scientists
https://www.independentsage.org/

I could go on, and on, and on.

Over to you for reputably sourced alternative explanations.

You are going on and on. All those you mention have all been discredited and all are subject to government influence. I just talk to doctors and nurses who dare not speak out. I've worked with the UK government for years and am well aware of statistics supplied to the media.

And as an aside accusing a group of scientists specifically set up because they disagree with the govt as being under the influence of the govt is really quite something.

[Vorpal]

This topic has been unlocked again. Please refrain from insults, snide comments, etc.

Thanks.

[Oldjohnw]

". have all been discredited.."

By whom?

[Cunobelin]

The other aspect that is annoying (for me personally) is the numerical drama. "Facts and statistics that are designed to "Wow" the audience and allow the rest to sneak through unnoticed

The classic for me this week was the vaccine announcement.

How effective - not mentioned
The longevity of the antibodies produced - not mentioned
Given that we do not know if the antibodies are effective in stopping a second infection - is a vaccine feasible - not mentioned.
How many doses can be manufactured and at what rate - not mentioned


Yet we the repeated and headlined "fact" that we can fit two million doses in a 1-litre lemonade bottle

Give the facts and statistics that are needed - quite the numerical theatre

[bigjim]

Well, I thought it wad already well known, but especially for you:

Official statistics, world renouned science and group of scientists independent of government follow.

The ONS https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... nddiseases

Imperial College Research Group.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-i ... 9-reports/

Independent Sage group of scientists
https://www.independentsage.org/

I could go on, and on, and on.

Over to you for reputably sourced alternative explanations.

You are going on and on. All those you mention have all been discredited and all are subject to government influence. I just talk to doctors and nurses who dare not speak out. I've worked with the UK government for years and am well aware of statistics supplied to the media.

And as an aside accusing a group of scientists specifically set up because they disagree with the govt as being under the influence of the govt is really quite something.

Hardly set up to disagree as they are advisors to the government.

[bigjim]

". have all been discredited.."

By whom?

Look for yourself. I'm not going to trawl the net for you. Ferguson has been outed time and again for his over the top predictions.

[roubaixtuesday]

You are going on and on. All those you mention have all been discredited and all are subject to government influence. I just talk to doctors and nurses who dare not speak out. I've worked with the UK government for years and am well aware of statistics supplied to the media.

And as an aside accusing a group of scientists specifically set up because they disagree with the govt as being under the influence of the govt is really quite something.

Hardly set up to disagree as they are advisors to the government.

They are *not* advisors to the government.

They set themselves up specifically because they didn't agree with the official group advising the government.

The only reason I provided them as a source was to demonstrate to you that the fundamentals of the pandemic are not disputed by anyone, whether or not associated with the government.

[roubaixtuesday]

". have all been discredited.."

By whom?

Look for yourself. I'm not going to trawl the net for you. Ferguson has been outed time and again for his over the top predictions.

So, not discredited at all.

[mjr]

". have all been discredited.."

By whom?

Look for yourself. I'm not going to trawl the net for you. Ferguson has been outed time and again for his over the top predictions.

I assume you mean his 500,000 no-controls prediction was over the top? There's no way of knowing.

Would you really call his 20,000 with-lockdown prediction he made in Q24 of https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/237/html/ "over the top"? It's looking like a massive underestimate now.