Jump to content

webtrekker

Members
  • Posts

    1,200
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by webtrekker

  1. The CDC Withdraw the Emergency Use of The PCR Test In 10 Days’ Time, Why Is It Still Being Used In The UK? Back in July 2021, The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced that its PCR test has failed its full review and will have its Emergency Use Authorization revoked. The Innova SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Rapid Qualitative Test, the CDC’s benchmark COVID diagnostic testing system, will be withdrawn for Emergency Use by the end of 2021 due to an inordinate frequency of false-positive and negative results. “The FDA has identified this as a Class I recall, the most serious type of recall. Use of these devices may cause serious injuries or death,” the FDA stated on its website. Read more here: https://dailyexpose.uk/2021/12/21/the-cdc-withdraw-the-emergency-use-of-the-pcr-test-in-10-days-time-why-is-it-still-being-used-in-the-uk/
  2. Yes, I've seen that link but not sure if it would be against forum rules if I had posted the link. Not that I'm against it though as I do a lot of 'torrenting' myself and already have a 'copy' of JFK's book!
  3. Regarding JFK Jr's new book ... I realise he's put a hell of a lot of work into this best-selling book, but because the information contained within it's pages is so vital to everyone worldwide I think it would be a significant gesture if he now released a free, downloadable version. Not everyone has the spare cash to shell out on a £25 hardback copy and most of the paperback versions seem to be sold out. This info could change millions (billions?) of minds over the whole planet. I believe crucial knowledge should be shared, not sold.
  4. Only to be expected. This is how they escalate the figures to astronomic proportions. Test, test, test everyone, even all of those with no symptoms, with a test that is geared up to produce false positives.
  5. From The Spectator ... Source: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/my-twitter-conversation-with-the-chairman-of-the-sage-covid-modelling-committee?s=09 My Twitter conversation with the chairman of the Sage Covid modelling committee 18 December 2021, 8:03pm Professor Graham Medley (photo: BBC) The latest Sage papers have been published, envisaging anything from 200 to 6,000 deaths a day from Omicron depending on how many more restrictions we’ll get — up to and very much including another lockdown. Earlier today I had an unexpected chance to ask questions of Graham Medley, the chair of the Sage modelling committee. He's a professor at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) which last weekend published a study on Omicron with very gloomy scenarios and making the case for more restrictions. But JP Morgan had a close look at this study and spotted something big: all the way through, LSHTM assumes that the Omicron variant is just as deadly as Delta. ‘But evidence from South Africa suggests that Omicron infections are milder,’ JP Morgan pointed out in a note to clients. Adjust for this, it found, and the picture changes dramatically: “Bed occupancy by Covid-19 patients at the end of January would be 33% of the peak seen in January 2021. This would be manageable without further restrictions. So JP Morgan had shown that, if you tweak one assumption (on severity) then — suddenly — no need for lockdown. Why was this scenario left out? Why would this fairly important and fairly basic fact on Omicron modelling not presented by Sage modellers like Professor Medley to ministers — and to the general public? I was thrilled for the chance to speak to him on Twitter. It was kind of him to make the time (he’s still going, as far as I can make out). The Spectator data hub has a page devoted to past Sage modelling vs actual, and I wanted to make sure I was not being unfair to Sage in my selection or presentation of those charts. The latest Sage paper-drop — the 6,000-deaths-a-day one — refers to ‘scenarios,’ not predictions. Professor Medley emphasises the distinction: saying something could happen is not saying that there's a realistic chance of it happening. But then why do Sage modellers publish some scenarios and not others? Apologies for the language at the end, but it was the last tweet that he replied to on this thread. Revealingly, he seemed to think my question odd: if it's quite plausible that Omicron is mild and doesn't threaten the NHS, what would be the point of including that as a 'scenario'? He seemed to suggest that he has been given a very limited brief, and asked to churn out worse-case scenarios without being asked to comment on how plausible they are. “We generally model what we are asked to model. There is a dialogue in which policy teams discuss with the modellers what they need to inform their policy. Might this remit mean leaving out just-as-plausible, quite-important scenarios that would not require lockdown? “Decision-makers are generally on only interested in situations where decisions have to be made. Note how careful he is to stay vague on whether any of the various scenarios in the Sage document are likely or even plausible. What happened to the original system of presenting a ‘reasonable worse-case scenario’ together with a central scenario? And what's the point of modelling if it doesn't say how likely any these scenarios are? From what Professor Medley says, it’s unclear that the most-likely scenario is even being presented to ministers this time around. So how are they supposed to make good decisions? I highly doubt that Sajid Javid is only asking to churn out models that make the case for lockdown. That instruction, if it is being issued, will have come from somewhere else. Professor Robert Dingwall, until recently a JCVI expert, has said that Medley’s candour reveals ‘a fundamental problem of scientific ethics in Sage’ — ie, a hardwired negativity bias. ‘The unquestioning response to the brief is very like that of SPI-B's behavioural scientists,’ he says and suggests that the Covid inquiry looks into all this. At a time when we have just been given a new set of ‘scenarios’ for a new year lockdown it might be good if someone — if not Professor Medley — would clear up what assumptions lie behind the new 6,000-a-day-dead scenario, and if emerging information from South Africa about Omicron and its virulence have been taken into account. And how probable it is that a double-jabbed and increasingly boosted nation (with 95 per cent antibody coverage) could see this worst-case scenario come to pass. In my view, this raises serious questions not just about Sage but about the quality of the advice used to make UK lockdown decisions. And the lack of transparency and scrutiny of that advice. The lives of millions of people rests on the quality of decisions, so the calibre of information supplied matters rather a lot — to all of us. I’ve asked Professor Medley to come on Spectator TV, to have a longer conversation outside Twitter. He has written for us before so I hope he accepts. For now, although I often curse the platform, I should thank Twitter for giving me the chance to ask some questions of someone so well-placed in such an important issue. Every day, The Spectator sends out am email summary of the Covid-19 news, science and data. Sign up for free here. Written byFraser Nelson Fraser Nelson is editor of The Spectator
  6. Boris Johnson Is A C*nt! https://t.me/ajrobertsshow/367
  7. We Won't Get Fooled Again! (Very apt band name too!) We'll be fighting in the streets With our children at our feet And the morals that they worship will be gone ...
  8. I've noticed for quite a while now that the vaxxed can't debate with anyone unvaxxed without raising their voices and shouting over the argument while the other person is speaking. Most of the unvaxxed stay quite calm and enen-tempered when putting their points across. It happens a lot on TV.
  9. In the governments eyes they are unvaccinated, and soon the 2-jabbers will be classed as unvaxxed too.
  10. A more accurate representation of true unvaxxed numbers in the UK? Right boys 'n' girls ('n' others too!), I needed to do this calculation myself as I haven't been entirely convinced by the wide-ranging figures (around 10 to 24 million supposedly unvaxxed in England alone!) touted by other sites. So, I've painstakingly gathered together, from OFFICIAL sources, the figures I need to calculate the number of UnVaxxed people in the UK. Firstly, what do we mean by UnVaxxed? My belief is that anyone in the Eligible Group, ie. 12 years old or more, that has had NO INJECTIONS or ONLY ONE INJECTION is, in the eyes of the Government, currently UnVaxxed. My method then is to first calculate the size of the Eligible Group by subtracting all of those under the age of 12 from the Total UK Population. Let's do that now - I am using figures from https://www.statista.com/statistics/281174/uk-population-by-age/ to determine how many are under 12 years of age. Ok, so 9.5 million of the current UK Population are under 12 and therefore not (yet?) eligible for vaccination. This gives - Eligibility: 68,407,231 (Current UK Total Population) - 9,573,110 (Not eligible, <12 years old) ---------- 58,834,121 Eligible for Vax ---------- Next, I use the official UK Gov figures for 1st and 2nd doses from https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations UK 1-dose = 51,463,255 UK 2-doses = 47,009,608 Therefore, people Eligible, but have received NO VAX is - 58,834,121 -51,463,255 ---------- 7,370,866 0-doses, UNVAXXED ---------- Because the 2nd dose group are within the 1st dose group (ie. you cannot have a 2nd dose until you have had the 1st), then we must subtract the 2nd dose group from the 1st dose group to get a true figure for those who have had only one dose - Eligible, and only received one dose: 51,463,255 -47,009,608 ---------- 4,453,647 1-dose, NOT FULLY VAXXED ---------- Finally, (thank feck for that, I hear you say!), we can add the 0-dose and 1-dose figures together to get a true representation of the number of UK citizens that are eligible for vaccination, but who have not been fully vaccinated (ie. only 0 or 1 doses) - Total Eligible but only received one or less Vax 7,370,866 + 4,453,647 ---------- 11,824,513 Total UNVAXXED (0 or 1-dose) ---------- That's nearly 12 MILLION people who are ELIGIBLE but have not been FULLY VAXXED (ie. 2 vaccinations or more adheringto Government rules) acording to my best estimation usng official Government figures. Even if you don't include the ones who have only had one vax (and I can't see why you would do this) it still leaves around 7.4 MILLION UnVaxxed, which is a good deal higher than the 5 Million stated by the MSM. There may well be more than this if they have been lying about the official numbers of vaccinations, but then again, would they do that?
  11. A more accurate representation of true unvaxxed numbers in the UK? Right boys 'n' girls ('n' others too!), I needed to do this calculation myself as I haven't been entirely convinced by the wide-ranging figures (around 10 to 24 million supposedly unvaxxed in England alone!) touted by other sites. So, I've painstakingly gathered together, from OFFICIAL sources, the figures I need to calculate the number of UnVaxxed people in the UK. Firstly, what do we mean by UnVaxxed? My belief is that anyone in the Eligible Group, ie. 12 years old or more, that has had NO INJECTIONS or ONLY ONE INJECTION is, in the eyes of the Government, currently UnVaxxed. My method then is to first calculate the size of the Eligible Group by subtracting all of those under the age of 12 from the Total UK Population. Let's do that now - I am using figures from https://www.statista.com/statistics/281174/uk-population-by-age/ to determine how many are under 12 years of age. Ok, so 9.5 million of the current UK Population are under 12 and therefore not (yet?) eligible for vaccination. This gives - Eligibility: 68,407,231 (Current UK Total Population) - 9,573,110 (Not eligible, <12 years old) ---------- 58,834,121 Eligible for Vax ---------- Next, I use the official UK Gov figures for 1st and 2nd doses from https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations UK 1-dose = 51,463,255 UK 2-doses = 47,009,608 Therefore, people Eligible, but have received NO VAX is - 58,834,121 -51,463,255 ---------- 7,370,866 0-doses, UNVAXXED ---------- Because the 2nd dose group are within the 1st dose group (ie. you cannot have a 2nd dose until you have had the 1st), then we must subtract the 2nd dose group from the 1st dose group to get a true figure for those who have had only one dose - Eligible, and only received one dose: 51,463,255 -47,009,608 ---------- 4,453,647 1-dose, NOT FULLY VAXXED ---------- Finally, (thank feck for that, I hear you say!), we can add the 0-dose and 1-dose figures together to get a true representation of the number of UK citizens that are eligible for vaccination, but who have not been fully vaccinated (ie. only 0 or 1 doses) - Total Eligible but only received one or less Vax 7,370,866 + 4,453,647 ---------- 11,824,513 Total UNVAXXED (0 or 1-dose) ---------- That's nearly 12 MILLION people who are ELIGIBLE but have not been FULLY VAXXED (ie. 2 vaccinations or more adheringto Government rules) acording to my best estimation usng official Government figures. Even if you don't include the ones who have only had one vax (and I can't see why you would do this) it still leaves around 7.4 MILLION UnVaxxed, which is a good deal higher than the 5 Million stated by the MSM. There may well be more than this if they have been lying about the official numbers of vaccinations, but then again, would they do that?
  12. My estimate is around 15 million from the eligible group, but that's over the whole UK and not just England. Still a hell of a lot from an entire population of around 68 million though.
  13. Interesting point of view, but from the figures that have been released I still believe that there are at least 15 million unjabbed. The thing is though, we unjabbed are now the Control Group seeing as they slyly got rid of the original Control Group from the trials by offering them the real shots as a 'goodwill gesture!' Now they are trying to get rid of us because an unvaccinated Control Group would expose the real intentions of the shots once people start dying off en masse.
  14. I can tell you're really struggling and, to be brutally honest, it doesn't look like the Cavalry are going to come charging over the horizon very soon and save our sorry arses. These governments are being very active in their persecution of all those that don't follow their commands to the letter, while all they have to contend with is a war of words, most of which they censor anyway. Until real rebellion occurs it looks as though things will just get worse day by day. But ..................... have faith in the fact that there are MILLIONS more of us than they care to admit and most of those will never swap sides. Believe me, the Day of Reckoning will come and those lily-livered, pot-bellied pigs will rue the day they started this!
  15. Why would anyone want to get a test for a 'virus' that has a 99.7% survival rate and they have no symptoms? I might consider wearing a mask, getting tested and vaccinated once Pfizer have released their documents .................... in 75 years time!
  16. Very sorry to hear that. I am not a religious person myself, but if I were, I would find it a bit rich to have to wear a mask when I thought He would at least protect me in His own house. What kind of God is that?
  17. Probably an attempt to discredit him. After reading his new book about Fauci I think most folk know which side of the fence he's on.
  18. Yep, I'd say triple is probably the best guess at the moment Ziggy, even allowing for dodgy maths from some of the 'conspiracy' sites that place it anywhere between 10 and 23 million. If only we could get this 15 million singing from the same hymn book.
  19. The only danger to society is that big fat Kinder egg himself!
  20. Exactly, and that's why OmiCON mysteriously appears straight after the boosters to give a 'reason' for all the upcoming deaths and serious illnesses.
×
×
  • Create New...