Jump to content

Coronavirus Mega-Thread.


numnuts
 Share

Message added by Grumpy Owl,

This topic is for all general discussion regarding the current COVID-19 pandemic. There are of course numerous other related topics for discussing specific aspects of this pandemic in more detail. And there are other parts of this forum for more 'off-topic' discussions.

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, sickofallthebollocks said:

Two days ago (the 29th jan) , sees the 2nd reading, if passed it will immediately proceed to the 3rd reading and so on, it contains the most draconian powers ever proposed in peace-time Britain. 
It will be rushed through parliament and the powers will last 2 years, the powers will affect freedome and take away rights.
Forced detention of anyone, including children, and for any amount of time.  Authorities will forcibly take biological samples from your body, powers last up to 2.5 years, state surveillance safeguards weakened, protections from forced detainment under mental health act lowered, cremations enforced against personal & religious wishes.
It also inemnifies the health service should they fail for whatever reason.
Only ONE medical 'officer; is required to sign off the 'compulsory treatment order'

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-01/0122/cbill_2019-20210122_en_1.htm?fbclid

image.png.9eb14a96f3334655aa12f98b4d2b0df6.png

 

I am confused by this because it is my understanding that the Coronavirus Bill (HC Bill 122) was introduced to Parliament on 19th March 2020 and became law - as the Coronavirus Act - on 25th March 2020 after receiving royal assent.

 

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8857/

https://services.parliament.uk/Bills/2019-21/coronavirus/documents.html

 

There was much discussion on the forum at the time of the implications including the possibility of detention (including of children), the lowering of Care Act standards, the lower threshold for detaining people for mental health reasons and changes to cremations and burial practices (incuding the removal of form 5). However, this probably all got lost in the hack.

 

Since the Act was passed (which has since been extended for another 6 months), the government have completed a U-turn on the provision for one Doctor to authorise detaining someone in hospital under the Mental Health Act 1983. We are thankfully back in the position that two Doctors need to authorise detaining a person. This was announced by Matt Hancock in the House of Commons on 30th September 2020:

 

Quote

When creating the Act, we included provisions to modify mental health legislation to reduce from two to one the number of doctors’ opinions needed to detain someone under the Mental Health Act 1983 and to extend legal time limits on the detention of mental health patients. These were always powers of last resort, and I was not persuaded, even in the peak, that they were necessary, because our mental health services have shown incredible resilience and ingenuity. I have therefore decided that these powers are no longer required in England and will not remain part of the Act. We will shortly bring forward the necessary secondary legislation to sunset these provisions.

 

https://www.keepbritainfree.com/forum/activism/government-u-turn-on-mental-health-laws-enshrines-world-class-protections-heading-into-2021

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

 

Did you notice tho, what the woman did?

 

 

Yeah bruv, but and I debated this with my pa,  the amount left at the end was not that much that she squirted out... But I did think it odd tbf, because usually they inject they whole lot.

 

She didn't eject the whole vaccine outside the car though I don't think?

 

What you reckon?

 

 

Edited by FrankVitali
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SimonTV said:

 

What you find interesting is there will not be a mention in the UK media about negative side effects from the vaccine. Because it will affect the vaccine up take. Is the UK even keeping track of it? who is keeping track of negative side effects in the UK? all seems far too rushed and unscientific. 

0BA8F346-2B92-4C16-A5C5-F2A6255FE58B.png.c610978fa06bbb625d9f05b2f723ab4f.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RIGHT WELL BITCHUTE CAN GO FUCK THEMSELVES, THEY ARE IN ON IT ALL.

 

LOOK WHEN I WENT TO WATCH A JUDY MIKOVTIZ VIDEO, THAT WAS THERE ABOUT 30 MINS PREVIOUSLY. THE ONE WITH KENNEDY JR AND SASHA STONE AND GILATO . FUCK EM.  :

 

2021-01-31_205345.jpg.9c16e5da348d05e06700ba73341213e3.jpg

 

 

 

SO BITCHUTE GOT A MODERATION TEAM HUH,, I'M  SO ANGRY.  

 

 

Now then, would anyone happen to have a link to a working copy of this 2hr long video?  I am such a dick I should have downloaded it. I thought I could trust bitchute.

 

 

Edited by FrankVitali
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shining-one said:

Referring to canal boats. If you run on electric motor and solar power, waterways licence is much cheaper. It can be cheaper to live than housing but it helps to be self-reliant. I have lived with very little money for years and survived recycling and repairing stuff thrown away. The way things are going I'm more persuaded there's never been a better time to drop out. I mean, in the great depression in New York, a lot of jobless people built makeshift homes and survived. The State in reality has no monopoly on our survival. What I will say is I won't be vaccinated no matter what employment or benefits are removed. The more the threat, the more determination to take the opposite path.

As my lady says. I’m going out because you told me I can’t.😁

we have always presumed that doing the opposite of government advice is the better option.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. Lee Merritt: In Animal Studies, After Being Injected With mRNA Technology, All Animals Died Upon Reinfection

HAFHAFJanuary 29, 2021
 

In the following interview, Dr. Lee Merritt explains that mRNA technology is not a vaccine, mirroring what Dr. David Martin also stated recently.

In animal studies, after mRNA injections have been administered to cats, when the virus arrived once again into the body, it arrived like a Trojan Horse, undetected by the cats’ own immune system. The virus multiplied unchallenged and all animals involved in the experiment died from various causes.

 

According to Dr. Lee Merritt,

 

What happened is all animals died… but they didn’t died of the “vaccine”. What they died from what used to be called “immune enhancement” and now they call it “antibody dependent enhancement” (ADE).

Here’s what happens:

They make the RNA and you get the “vaccine” and you do fine. Now, you challenge the animal with the virus that you are supposed to be immunizing against.

So when they challenged those cats with SARS [a.k.a. SARS-CoV-1, is a coronavirus species], instead of killing the virus or weakening it, the immune response that they built into your system when out and codded the virus, so the virus came into the cat’s body like a Trojan Horse, unseen by the cat’s own immune system, and then it replicated without checking and killed the cat with overwhelming sepsis and cardiac failure. And that [also] happened in ferrets, that happened every time they tried this.

Let me just point out. We have never made it through an animal study successfully for this type of virus.

We have never done this in humans before… We don’t really have a track record of success.

 

This vaccine was rolled out to distribution centers before they even made a show of caring about the FDA approving it. Do you realize that?

I’ve never seen that happen before.

https://humansarefree.com/2021/01/dr-lee-merritt-animal-studies-mrna-technology-all-animals-died.html

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Macnamara said:

Dr. Lee Merritt: In Animal Studies, After Being Injected With mRNA Technology, All Animals Died Upon Reinfection

HAFHAFJanuary 29, 2021
 

In the following interview, Dr. Lee Merritt explains that mRNA technology is not a vaccine, mirroring what Dr. David Martin also stated recently.

In animal studies, after mRNA injections have been administered to cats, when the virus arrived once again into the body, it arrived like a Trojan Horse, undetected by the cats’ own immune system. The virus multiplied unchallenged and all animals involved in the experiment died from various causes.

 

According to Dr. Lee Merritt,

 

What happened is all animals died… but they didn’t died of the “vaccine”. What they died from what used to be called “immune enhancement” and now they call it “antibody dependent enhancement” (ADE).

Here’s what happens:

They make the RNA and you get the “vaccine” and you do fine. Now, you challenge the animal with the virus that you are supposed to be immunizing against.

So when they challenged those cats with SARS [a.k.a. SARS-CoV-1, is a coronavirus species], instead of killing the virus or weakening it, the immune response that they built into your system when out and codded the virus, so the virus came into the cat’s body like a Trojan Horse, unseen by the cat’s own immune system, and then it replicated without checking and killed the cat with overwhelming sepsis and cardiac failure. And that [also] happened in ferrets, that happened every time they tried this.

Let me just point out. We have never made it through an animal study successfully for this type of virus.

We have never done this in humans before… We don’t really have a track record of success.

 

This vaccine was rolled out to distribution centers before they even made a show of caring about the FDA approving it. Do you realize that?

I’ve never seen that happen before.

https://humansarefree.com/2021/01/dr-lee-merritt-animal-studies-mrna-technology-all-animals-died.html

 

 

 

Yep its terrible. Called ADE Anitbody Dependent Enhancment. Or aka Cytokine Storm.

 

 

 

Edited by FrankVitali
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FrankVitali said:

Yep its terrible. Called ADE Anitbody Dependent Enhancment. Or aka Cytokine Storm

 

we really need to keep hammering this home because as people start to drop over time due to the injections causing 'immune enhancement' the government and the complicit corporate media will try and spin it to claim that it is a new 'mutated strain' or a new virus altogether to keep people believing in the bogeyman

 

we need people to see that the jabs themselves ARE the bioweapon

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Macnamara said:

 

we really need to keep hammering this home because as people start to drop over time due to the injections causing 'immune enhancement' the government and the complicit corporate media will try and spin it to claim that it is a new 'mutated strain' or a new virus altogether to keep people believing in the bogeyman

 

we need people to see that the jabs themselves ARE the bioweapon

 

 

Spot on mate. So glad you're aware.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, FrankVitali said:

Spot on mate. So glad you're aware.

 

now we just need the awareness to grow!

 

''Vaccine industry money has neutralized virtually all of the checks and balances that once stood between a rapacious pharmaceutical industry and our children''

 

“The greatest crisis that America faces today is the chronic disease epidemic in America’s children.” - Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Mitochondrial Eve said:

 

I am confused by this because it is my understanding that the Coronavirus Bill (HC Bill 122) was introduced to Parliament on 19th March 2020 and became law - as the Coronavirus Act - on 25th March 2020 after receiving royal assent.

 

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8857/

https://services.parliament.uk/Bills/2019-21/coronavirus/documents.html

 

https://www.keepbritainfree.com/forum/activism/government-u-turn-on-mental-health-laws-enshrines-world-class-protections-heading-into-2021

Hey Eve, this has me really confused too now, (not a difficult thing fo rme to get confused) I was thinking these are ammendments to the bill - wil check...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, FrankVitali said:

 

 

Yeah bruv, but and I debated this with my pa,  the amount left at the end was not that much that she squirted out... But I did think it odd tbf, because usually they inject they whole lot.

 

She didn't eject the whole vaccine outside the car though I don't think?

 

What you reckon?

 

 

The plunger is obscured by her hand during the procedure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Shocker! New Official Data Exposes UK Lockdown Lies!

Published on January 31, 2021

Written by Dr Darko Butina

 

bhvbhv.jpg?resize=550%2C229&ssl=1

The latest ONS release of the Annual Death Rates for England and Wales for years 1953-2020 places year 2020 in 22nd place (out of 68) and shows that the Covid-19 virus causes FEWER deaths than flu viruses in the previous years.

Below we share with readers official government data to demonstrate that Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has no reasonable scientific basis at all to continue with any lockdown measures.

Below we present a graph with an accurate plot of all Office of National Statistics (ONS) data on full annual mortality rates for every year from 1953 to the end of 2020.

fhhfh.jpg?resize=755%2C399&ssl=1

Each Yellow Dot Represents Annual Death Rate Between 1953 And 2020.The Years, X-Axis, Are Plotted In Chronological Order, While The Annual Deaths Rates Are Plotted On The Y-Axis.

When adjusting for the fact that the UK population was only 50 million in 1953 and risen steeply in recent years to over 68 million today!

For all you non-mathematicians out there, to calculate ‘Annual Death Rates’ one needs two parameters:

(1) the number of annual death certificates, and:

(2) the size of population for each year.

Then you must take the annual deaths and divide them by the size of population that year and the resulting number multiplied by 1,000 and reported as Annual Death Rates per 1,000 population:

Annual Death Rates (Per 1000 Population) = ( Annual Death/Annual Population) X 1,000 (1)

The British government has been misleading the general public by being wilfully alarmist. Their ‘experts’ knew full well how to make these calculations, but deliberately did not represent death rates on a like-for-like basis e.g. by calculating deaths per thousand head of population.

The final figures for the Total Weekly Deaths for England and Wales (E&W) were released in the second week of January 2021, followed by the release of historical data later that week which allowed construction of the graph above.

Before we discuss how to interpret and describe the graph in Fig.1 above, let us first look at the sample table which is needed to construct that graph and identify the importance of using the rate of death, rather than just the simple number of deaths.

vbvbv-1.jpg?resize=599%2C258&ssl=1

The sample table above consists of 4 columns, Year, UK population, Annual Deaths for England and Wales, E&W, and Death Rates per 1,000 population. The first 5 rows have the numbers for oldest years 1953 to 1957, while the last 5 years are listed at the bottom.

The two numbers highlighted in yellow explain the reasons for NOT using the annual death numbers on their own. If we were to plot annual deaths as a single number, the year 2020 would be described as the deadliest one since 1953, which is exactly what the news outlets like BBC has been and still is doing.

However, if you compare the UK population in 1953 to 2020, you will notice that the year 2020 has 17 million more people than 1953 and therefore larger annual deaths rate.

Now that the formula and the reasons for expressing annual deaths rates has been explained, let me tackle the issue of the term ‘annual death for E&W’ upon which the graph in Fig.1 was built.

The main function of the Office for National Statistics, ONS, at www.ons.gov.uk, is to produce annual statistics on the key indicators that define the country’s health and prosperity. The three most important annual numbers for any country are the size of Population, the Natality, and the Mortality Rates, which can be calculated only after the total number of the birth and deaths certificates have been published.

The key word here is annual as the time unit for comparison between years.

In other words, it is only possible to produce annual statistics for a given year in the year after, once all the relevant numbers have been compiled!

The two numbers needed to calculate the death rates for the 2020 UK population was announced in June 2020, while the total weekly deaths for E&W were published in 2nd week of 2021.

The annual death numbers for E&W are obtained by adding up the ONS database field called ‘Total Deaths, all ages and all causes’ that is reported for each week of the year. Please note, that the extra week in leap years, week no 53, is ignored in order to allow direct comparison between the leap and non-leap years.

The last part of the puzzle missing to solve the discrepancy between the frenzy of reporting Covid-related  death is to understand what the numbers quoted as the annual death mean and how they were obtained.

The total annual deaths numbers are obtained by simply counting the number of death certificates that have been issued in any given year. What any government need, is to simply compare annual numbers of death certificates and birth certificates, divide those numbers by the annual population and use two key parameters, death, and natality rates to plan for the future in terms of schools, jobs, and hospitals.

Let Us Now Analyse Fig.1 And Explain What The Annual Deaths Rates For Years 1953 To 2020 Are Telling Us And Offer An Explanation Why This Graph Is In Total Contrast With The Fake News Media Reports Which State, ‘Covid-19 Deaths Never Seen In Our Lifetime’ Or ‘Since Spanish Flu In 1918’.

Let us start with re-iterating the fact that the annual death rates are based on the number of deaths certificates only, so that any attempt to ‘extract’ some additional information, like cause of death, the information that is not there, is nonsensical.

What is obviously the first shock in looking at the chronological annual deaths rates, which do not lie, is the fact that

  • All the years between 1953 and 2003 had annual deaths rates higher than 2020
  • The major flu epidemic years of 1957, 1968 and 1999 have the higher death rates than Covid year 2020
  • The only possible interpretation of those historical facts is that the Covid-19 is just another flu virus that is less deadly than the previous flu viruses
  • It must follow that the number of deaths claimed to be caused by the Covid-19 virus are result of the computational models with 0% accuracy and developed by the discredited scientists
  • It must also follow, that the decision to invoke Martial law on the whole of the UK population had a sole purpose of testing the accuracy of prediction of those models

This now raises a question that the government has to answer: What possible information did the government have in March 2020 that justified the first lockdown of 66 million people?

If we look at the graph, the year 1963 had the highest deaths rate since 1953, while the preceding 2019 had one of the lowest rates.

So, again, what was a trigger, which should have been based on some scientific facts, in March 2020 when the annual death rate for the UK population was NOT known?

Since the weekly total deaths numbers do not have any additional information about the causes of death, it must follow, that the decision to announce the first lockdown must have been based on some speculative and extremely simplistic models and as we know now, they had 0% accuracy.

The sole purpose of this report is to present the first analysis of the annual deaths rates for E&W after annual numbers for 2020 became available and allowed a direct comparison with the historical data going back to 1953.

One point to emphasise here is that the annual mortality rates would detect any cataclysmic deaths event which would increase death certificates numbers by say, 20%, but more on this topic in another report.

The more detailed analysis of Covid-19 genesis will be published soon, but let me finish this report with a few important statements:

  1. The medical definition describing flu is that flu does not kill, but it can cause death indirectly by affecting people with pre-existing health problems
  2. The weekly death numbers for week 16 and 17 (in April) are the highest recorded since 1999, but not if the population of 2020 is considered (get your numbers straight BBC!)
  3. I am grateful to the Office for National Statistics for free access to their database and the links to the source of data used in this report can be found under References

Let us return to some sort of sanity and finish by recognising the fact that for 1.00% of those who die (600,000), 99% do survive (66,000,000):

jbjbj-2.jpg?resize=767%2C283&ssl=1

The only difference between the two pie charts in Fig.2 is that the people who lived or died between 1953 and 2019 have been free to socialise, travel, go to schools, universities and to work. In contrast, all of us who survived in 2020 are still imprisoned in our homes while nothing has been altered in terms of annual mortality rates since 1953!

Links to datasets on www.ons.gov.uk :

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/datasets/vitalstatisticspopulationandhealthreferencetables

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

About the author: Dr Darko Butina is retired scientist with 20 years of experience in experimental carbon-based chemistry in drug discovery and 20 years of experience of modelling data generated by calibrated instruments and various biological screens. Since 2010, he published 3 papers analysing daily temperature patterns across the globe, with 3 more coming out in next 2-3 months. He also runs his own webpage at www.l4patterns.com.

 

Source From https://principia-scientific.com/shocker-new-official-data-exposes-uk-lockdown-lies/

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, zarkov said:

 

Shocker! New Official Data Exposes UK Lockdown Lies!

Published on January 31, 2021

Written by Dr Darko Butina

 

bhvbhv.jpg?resize=550%2C229&ssl=1

The latest ONS release of the Annual Death Rates for England and Wales for years 1953-2020 places year 2020 in 22nd place (out of 68) and shows that the Covid-19 virus causes FEWER deaths than flu viruses in the previous years.

Below we share with readers official government data to demonstrate that Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has no reasonable scientific basis at all to continue with any lockdown measures.

Below we present a graph with an accurate plot of all Office of National Statistics (ONS) data on full annual mortality rates for every year from 1953 to the end of 2020.

fhhfh.jpg?resize=755%2C399&ssl=1

Each Yellow Dot Represents Annual Death Rate Between 1953 And 2020.The Years, X-Axis, Are Plotted In Chronological Order, While The Annual Deaths Rates Are Plotted On The Y-Axis.

When adjusting for the fact that the UK population was only 50 million in 1953 and risen steeply in recent years to over 68 million today!

For all you non-mathematicians out there, to calculate ‘Annual Death Rates’ one needs two parameters:

(1) the number of annual death certificates, and:

(2) the size of population for each year.

Then you must take the annual deaths and divide them by the size of population that year and the resulting number multiplied by 1,000 and reported as Annual Death Rates per 1,000 population:

Annual Death Rates (Per 1000 Population) = ( Annual Death/Annual Population) X 1,000 (1)

The British government has been misleading the general public by being wilfully alarmist. Their ‘experts’ knew full well how to make these calculations, but deliberately did not represent death rates on a like-for-like basis e.g. by calculating deaths per thousand head of population.

The final figures for the Total Weekly Deaths for England and Wales (E&W) were released in the second week of January 2021, followed by the release of historical data later that week which allowed construction of the graph above.

Before we discuss how to interpret and describe the graph in Fig.1 above, let us first look at the sample table which is needed to construct that graph and identify the importance of using the rate of death, rather than just the simple number of deaths.

vbvbv-1.jpg?resize=599%2C258&ssl=1

The sample table above consists of 4 columns, Year, UK population, Annual Deaths for England and Wales, E&W, and Death Rates per 1,000 population. The first 5 rows have the numbers for oldest years 1953 to 1957, while the last 5 years are listed at the bottom.

The two numbers highlighted in yellow explain the reasons for NOT using the annual death numbers on their own. If we were to plot annual deaths as a single number, the year 2020 would be described as the deadliest one since 1953, which is exactly what the news outlets like BBC has been and still is doing.

However, if you compare the UK population in 1953 to 2020, you will notice that the year 2020 has 17 million more people than 1953 and therefore larger annual deaths rate.

Now that the formula and the reasons for expressing annual deaths rates has been explained, let me tackle the issue of the term ‘annual death for E&W’ upon which the graph in Fig.1 was built.

The main function of the Office for National Statistics, ONS, at www.ons.gov.uk, is to produce annual statistics on the key indicators that define the country’s health and prosperity. The three most important annual numbers for any country are the size of Population, the Natality, and the Mortality Rates, which can be calculated only after the total number of the birth and deaths certificates have been published.

The key word here is annual as the time unit for comparison between years.

In other words, it is only possible to produce annual statistics for a given year in the year after, once all the relevant numbers have been compiled!

The two numbers needed to calculate the death rates for the 2020 UK population was announced in June 2020, while the total weekly deaths for E&W were published in 2nd week of 2021.

The annual death numbers for E&W are obtained by adding up the ONS database field called ‘Total Deaths, all ages and all causes’ that is reported for each week of the year. Please note, that the extra week in leap years, week no 53, is ignored in order to allow direct comparison between the leap and non-leap years.

The last part of the puzzle missing to solve the discrepancy between the frenzy of reporting Covid-related  death is to understand what the numbers quoted as the annual death mean and how they were obtained.

The total annual deaths numbers are obtained by simply counting the number of death certificates that have been issued in any given year. What any government need, is to simply compare annual numbers of death certificates and birth certificates, divide those numbers by the annual population and use two key parameters, death, and natality rates to plan for the future in terms of schools, jobs, and hospitals.

Let Us Now Analyse Fig.1 And Explain What The Annual Deaths Rates For Years 1953 To 2020 Are Telling Us And Offer An Explanation Why This Graph Is In Total Contrast With The Fake News Media Reports Which State, ‘Covid-19 Deaths Never Seen In Our Lifetime’ Or ‘Since Spanish Flu In 1918’.

Let us start with re-iterating the fact that the annual death rates are based on the number of deaths certificates only, so that any attempt to ‘extract’ some additional information, like cause of death, the information that is not there, is nonsensical.

What is obviously the first shock in looking at the chronological annual deaths rates, which do not lie, is the fact that

  • All the years between 1953 and 2003 had annual deaths rates higher than 2020
  • The major flu epidemic years of 1957, 1968 and 1999 have the higher death rates than Covid year 2020
  • The only possible interpretation of those historical facts is that the Covid-19 is just another flu virus that is less deadly than the previous flu viruses
  • It must follow that the number of deaths claimed to be caused by the Covid-19 virus are result of the computational models with 0% accuracy and developed by the discredited scientists
  • It must also follow, that the decision to invoke Martial law on the whole of the UK population had a sole purpose of testing the accuracy of prediction of those models

This now raises a question that the government has to answer: What possible information did the government have in March 2020 that justified the first lockdown of 66 million people?

If we look at the graph, the year 1963 had the highest deaths rate since 1953, while the preceding 2019 had one of the lowest rates.

So, again, what was a trigger, which should have been based on some scientific facts, in March 2020 when the annual death rate for the UK population was NOT known?

Since the weekly total deaths numbers do not have any additional information about the causes of death, it must follow, that the decision to announce the first lockdown must have been based on some speculative and extremely simplistic models and as we know now, they had 0% accuracy.

The sole purpose of this report is to present the first analysis of the annual deaths rates for E&W after annual numbers for 2020 became available and allowed a direct comparison with the historical data going back to 1953.

One point to emphasise here is that the annual mortality rates would detect any cataclysmic deaths event which would increase death certificates numbers by say, 20%, but more on this topic in another report.

The more detailed analysis of Covid-19 genesis will be published soon, but let me finish this report with a few important statements:

  1. The medical definition describing flu is that flu does not kill, but it can cause death indirectly by affecting people with pre-existing health problems
  2. The weekly death numbers for week 16 and 17 (in April) are the highest recorded since 1999, but not if the population of 2020 is considered (get your numbers straight BBC!)
  3. I am grateful to the Office for National Statistics for free access to their database and the links to the source of data used in this report can be found under References

Let us return to some sort of sanity and finish by recognising the fact that for 1.00% of those who die (600,000), 99% do survive (66,000,000):

jbjbj-2.jpg?resize=767%2C283&ssl=1

The only difference between the two pie charts in Fig.2 is that the people who lived or died between 1953 and 2019 have been free to socialise, travel, go to schools, universities and to work. In contrast, all of us who survived in 2020 are still imprisoned in our homes while nothing has been altered in terms of annual mortality rates since 1953!

Links to datasets on www.ons.gov.uk :

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/datasets/vitalstatisticspopulationandhealthreferencetables

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

About the author: Dr Darko Butina is retired scientist with 20 years of experience in experimental carbon-based chemistry in drug discovery and 20 years of experience of modelling data generated by calibrated instruments and various biological screens. Since 2010, he published 3 papers analysing daily temperature patterns across the globe, with 3 more coming out in next 2-3 months. He also runs his own webpage at www.l4patterns.com.

 

Source From https://principia-scientific.com/shocker-new-official-data-exposes-uk-lockdown-lies/

 

SAME MISTAKE with figures in the table as I made - eg. THE total DEATH number is for ENGLAND and WALES, yet the population figure given is that for the UK i.e. ENGLAND + WALES + IRELAND + SCOTLAND.

 

I have pointed this out in previous postings and whilst it does alter the ratios the general pattern is valid in that the 2020 values indicate that it is NOT a PANDEMIC year!!!

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bullion said:

0BA8F346-2B92-4C16-A5C5-F2A6255FE58B.png.c610978fa06bbb625d9f05b2f723ab4f.png

So they really are anticipated LOADS of adverse effects. Its like when they invade the middle east and claim ''ooh thats collateral damage'' kill them into freedom? How does that work

 

Make people healthy by giving them POTENTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS its a joke!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, zarkov said:

 

Shocker! New Official Data Exposes UK Lockdown Lies!

Published on January 31, 2021

Written by Dr Darko Butina

 

bhvbhv.jpg?resize=550%2C229&ssl=1

The latest ONS release of the Annual Death Rates for England and Wales for years 1953-2020 places year 2020 in 22nd place (out of 68) and shows that the Covid-19 virus causes FEWER deaths than flu viruses in the previous years.

Below we share with readers official government data to demonstrate that Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has no reasonable scientific basis at all to continue with any lockdown measures.

Below we present a graph with an accurate plot of all Office of National Statistics (ONS) data on full annual mortality rates for every year from 1953 to the end of 2020.

fhhfh.jpg?resize=755%2C399&ssl=1

Each Yellow Dot Represents Annual Death Rate Between 1953 And 2020.The Years, X-Axis, Are Plotted In Chronological Order, While The Annual Deaths Rates Are Plotted On The Y-Axis.

When adjusting for the fact that the UK population was only 50 million in 1953 and risen steeply in recent years to over 68 million today!

For all you non-mathematicians out there, to calculate ‘Annual Death Rates’ one needs two parameters:

(1) the number of annual death certificates, and:

(2) the size of population for each year.

Then you must take the annual deaths and divide them by the size of population that year and the resulting number multiplied by 1,000 and reported as Annual Death Rates per 1,000 population:

Annual Death Rates (Per 1000 Population) = ( Annual Death/Annual Population) X 1,000 (1)

The British government has been misleading the general public by being wilfully alarmist. Their ‘experts’ knew full well how to make these calculations, but deliberately did not represent death rates on a like-for-like basis e.g. by calculating deaths per thousand head of population.

The final figures for the Total Weekly Deaths for England and Wales (E&W) were released in the second week of January 2021, followed by the release of historical data later that week which allowed construction of the graph above.

Before we discuss how to interpret and describe the graph in Fig.1 above, let us first look at the sample table which is needed to construct that graph and identify the importance of using the rate of death, rather than just the simple number of deaths.

vbvbv-1.jpg?resize=599%2C258&ssl=1

The sample table above consists of 4 columns, Year, UK population, Annual Deaths for England and Wales, E&W, and Death Rates per 1,000 population. The first 5 rows have the numbers for oldest years 1953 to 1957, while the last 5 years are listed at the bottom.

The two numbers highlighted in yellow explain the reasons for NOT using the annual death numbers on their own. If we were to plot annual deaths as a single number, the year 2020 would be described as the deadliest one since 1953, which is exactly what the news outlets like BBC has been and still is doing.

However, if you compare the UK population in 1953 to 2020, you will notice that the year 2020 has 17 million more people than 1953 and therefore larger annual deaths rate.

Now that the formula and the reasons for expressing annual deaths rates has been explained, let me tackle the issue of the term ‘annual death for E&W’ upon which the graph in Fig.1 was built.

The main function of the Office for National Statistics, ONS, at www.ons.gov.uk, is to produce annual statistics on the key indicators that define the country’s health and prosperity. The three most important annual numbers for any country are the size of Population, the Natality, and the Mortality Rates, which can be calculated only after the total number of the birth and deaths certificates have been published.

The key word here is annual as the time unit for comparison between years.

In other words, it is only possible to produce annual statistics for a given year in the year after, once all the relevant numbers have been compiled!

The two numbers needed to calculate the death rates for the 2020 UK population was announced in June 2020, while the total weekly deaths for E&W were published in 2nd week of 2021.

The annual death numbers for E&W are obtained by adding up the ONS database field called ‘Total Deaths, all ages and all causes’ that is reported for each week of the year. Please note, that the extra week in leap years, week no 53, is ignored in order to allow direct comparison between the leap and non-leap years.

The last part of the puzzle missing to solve the discrepancy between the frenzy of reporting Covid-related  death is to understand what the numbers quoted as the annual death mean and how they were obtained.

The total annual deaths numbers are obtained by simply counting the number of death certificates that have been issued in any given year. What any government need, is to simply compare annual numbers of death certificates and birth certificates, divide those numbers by the annual population and use two key parameters, death, and natality rates to plan for the future in terms of schools, jobs, and hospitals.

Let Us Now Analyse Fig.1 And Explain What The Annual Deaths Rates For Years 1953 To 2020 Are Telling Us And Offer An Explanation Why This Graph Is In Total Contrast With The Fake News Media Reports Which State, ‘Covid-19 Deaths Never Seen In Our Lifetime’ Or ‘Since Spanish Flu In 1918’.

Let us start with re-iterating the fact that the annual death rates are based on the number of deaths certificates only, so that any attempt to ‘extract’ some additional information, like cause of death, the information that is not there, is nonsensical.

What is obviously the first shock in looking at the chronological annual deaths rates, which do not lie, is the fact that

  • All the years between 1953 and 2003 had annual deaths rates higher than 2020
  • The major flu epidemic years of 1957, 1968 and 1999 have the higher death rates than Covid year 2020
  • The only possible interpretation of those historical facts is that the Covid-19 is just another flu virus that is less deadly than the previous flu viruses
  • It must follow that the number of deaths claimed to be caused by the Covid-19 virus are result of the computational models with 0% accuracy and developed by the discredited scientists
  • It must also follow, that the decision to invoke Martial law on the whole of the UK population had a sole purpose of testing the accuracy of prediction of those models

This now raises a question that the government has to answer: What possible information did the government have in March 2020 that justified the first lockdown of 66 million people?

If we look at the graph, the year 1963 had the highest deaths rate since 1953, while the preceding 2019 had one of the lowest rates.

So, again, what was a trigger, which should have been based on some scientific facts, in March 2020 when the annual death rate for the UK population was NOT known?

Since the weekly total deaths numbers do not have any additional information about the causes of death, it must follow, that the decision to announce the first lockdown must have been based on some speculative and extremely simplistic models and as we know now, they had 0% accuracy.

The sole purpose of this report is to present the first analysis of the annual deaths rates for E&W after annual numbers for 2020 became available and allowed a direct comparison with the historical data going back to 1953.

One point to emphasise here is that the annual mortality rates would detect any cataclysmic deaths event which would increase death certificates numbers by say, 20%, but more on this topic in another report.

The more detailed analysis of Covid-19 genesis will be published soon, but let me finish this report with a few important statements:

  1. The medical definition describing flu is that flu does not kill, but it can cause death indirectly by affecting people with pre-existing health problems
  2. The weekly death numbers for week 16 and 17 (in April) are the highest recorded since 1999, but not if the population of 2020 is considered (get your numbers straight BBC!)
  3. I am grateful to the Office for National Statistics for free access to their database and the links to the source of data used in this report can be found under References

Let us return to some sort of sanity and finish by recognising the fact that for 1.00% of those who die (600,000), 99% do survive (66,000,000):

jbjbj-2.jpg?resize=767%2C283&ssl=1

The only difference between the two pie charts in Fig.2 is that the people who lived or died between 1953 and 2019 have been free to socialise, travel, go to schools, universities and to work. In contrast, all of us who survived in 2020 are still imprisoned in our homes while nothing has been altered in terms of annual mortality rates since 1953!

Links to datasets on www.ons.gov.uk :

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/datasets/vitalstatisticspopulationandhealthreferencetables

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

About the author: Dr Darko Butina is retired scientist with 20 years of experience in experimental carbon-based chemistry in drug discovery and 20 years of experience of modelling data generated by calibrated instruments and various biological screens. Since 2010, he published 3 papers analysing daily temperature patterns across the globe, with 3 more coming out in next 2-3 months. He also runs his own webpage at www.l4patterns.com.

 

Source From https://principia-scientific.com/shocker-new-official-data-exposes-uk-lockdown-lies/

 

 

This is just the thing I was looking for mate thanks @zarkov bud, well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FrankVitali said:

 

 

This is just the thing I was looking for mate thanks @zarkov bud, well done.

 

BUT do check the FOLLOWING:

SAME MISTAKE with figures in the table as I made - eg. THE total DEATH number is for ENGLAND and WALES, yet the population figure given is that for the UK i.e. ENGLAND + WALES + IRELAND + SCOTLAND.

 

I have pointed this out in previous postings and whilst it does alter the ratios the general pattern is valid in that the 2020 values indicate that it is NOT a PANDEMIC year!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, sickofallthebollocks said:

 

image.png.fa620bc53f52c20244bb25c23e18bff3.png

 

 

I have absolutely no respect for UK police after some of the horrific things I have seen them do. No respect whatsoever.  *spit*..   They are inhumane.  I used to have a 'little' respect, but none whatsoever nowadays. Not after seeing some of the things I've seen.

 

If you watch a policeman beating up an innocent elderly person with their truncheon. That is not cool and it is happening far too often now.

 

They are nothing but thugs. And if you watched them do the same thing without the police uniform you would be even more disgusted.

 

Police uniform does not give you the right to beat up innocent people who are out there protesting in favour of freedom of speech and whatnot.  Elderly or not I hasten to add.

 

These Austrian police, be it on their own heads that they are not doing this for propaganda purposes!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Concerned Citizen said:

 

BUT do check the FOLLOWING:

SAME MISTAKE with figures in the table as I made - eg. THE total DEATH number is for ENGLAND and WALES, yet the population figure given is that for the UK i.e. ENGLAND + WALES + IRELAND + SCOTLAND.

 

I have pointed this out in previous postings and whilst it does alter the ratios the general pattern is valid in that the 2020 values indicate that it is NOT a PANDEMIC year!!!

 

Yes point noted thanks bro,

 

You ceecee?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Concerned Citizen said:

 

BUT do check the FOLLOWING:

SAME MISTAKE with figures in the table as I made - eg. THE total DEATH number is for ENGLAND and WALES, yet the population figure given is that for the UK i.e. ENGLAND + WALES + IRELAND + SCOTLAND.

 

I have pointed this out in previous postings and whilst it does alter the ratios the general pattern is valid in that the 2020 values indicate that it is NOT a PANDEMIC year!!!

Like and agree, but have to post! 

The comment under the article at source has mentioned similar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...