The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread

[Archied]

1 minute ago, PistoldPete said:

And who are the vulnerable in your view?

Those above 60 and with co morbidity s ,

take a look at the stats of who are dying from covid in any great numbers,

I also think mass vaccination is very much likely to produce variants

[maxjam]

3 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I’ve just given you the reason why more people are dying at home rather than in hospital. 
 

and quoting accurate data but out of context as Jenkins id doing is a well used tactic. 
 

yes so 93.5 % of deaths are not from COVID. So? He is showing he can deduct a number from 100% . So what?
 

yes so more people are dying at home than before the pandemic( for reasons I have explained) 

 

but why quote these two unrelated facts together? If not to project an agenda that is entirely spurious? Or pander to the conspiracy theorists and feed more clickbait?

I've missed the bit where you've told me why more people are dying at home rather than hospital?

According to this its due to familiar causes such as cancer, dementia, heart disease;

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/blog/2021/06/understanding-why-deaths-home-increased-covid-19-pandemic

Jamie Jenkins produces a lot of data.  All of it factual from the Govts own data.  This particular stat used in conjunction with others showed us that only approx 7% of deaths currently are with covid and hospital admissions were 70% down on this time last year.  Read into it what you want, but they are the facts.

Now what do numerous politicians, TV shows, newspapers want to achieve by repeating false data? 

I think you are confusing who is actually presenting actual, reliable data so you can make an informed opinion with those that actually want to keep you living in fear and earn more revenue from clickbait. 

[Wolfie]

41 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Boris didn't say it 'stops us from vaccinating others*' he just said it 'stops us from infecting others'.  

*insert whatever caveat.

If we just stick to football, in recent days Brentford (100% vaccinated) and Liverpool (99% vaccinated) have called off matches due to covid outbreaks.  The vaccines don't seem to have 'stopped us from infecting others' there.

How do you know they didn't all catch it from unvaccinated people?. I know that's not likely but....

(made up numbers for illustration):

If we accept that the vaccine reduces the risk of infecting others (due to lower viral load; lesser symptoms or whatever - doesn't matter how).......

Even if an unvaccinated person infects 10 people and a vaccinated person still infects 9, then the vaccine has stopped one person from being infected. So, as I said, the vaccine does stop people being infected. Just not all of them - which nobody has ever claimed, as far as I have seen.

[PistoldPete]

8 minutes ago, maxjam said:

I've missed the bit where you've told me why more people are dying at home rather than hospital?

According to this its due to familiar causes such as cancer, dementia, heart disease;

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/blog/2021/06/understanding-why-deaths-home-increased-covid-19-pandemic

Jamie Jenkins produces a lot of data.  All of it factual from the Govts own data.  This particular stat used in conjunction with others showed us that only approx 7% of deaths currently are with covid and hospital admissions were 70% down on this time last year.  Read into it what you want, but they are the facts.

Now what do numerous politicians, TV shows, newspapers want to achieve by repeating false data? 

I think you are confusing who is actually presenting actual, reliable data so you can make an informed opinion with those that actually want to keep you living in fear and earn more revenue from clickbait. 

Well I think I’ve said three times why more people are dying at home rather than in hospital.

if you are dying of cancer or dementia what is the point of being admitted to hospital where your relatives will not be able to visit you in your dying days due to COVID restrictions. 
 

and again what point is it he is trying to make by this? Is he trying to say these people could have been saved if only they had made it to hospital? That more excess deaths have occurred from people who have died from NON covid causes than have died from COVID.? 
 

that seems to be what he is trying to imply and if so , he is indeed being deliberately misleading.

[maxjam]

7 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

and again what point is it he is trying to make by this? Is he trying to say these people could have been saved if only they had made it to hospital? That more excess deaths have occurred from people who have died from NON covid causes than have died from COVID.? 
 

that seems to be what he is trying to imply and if so , he is indeed being deliberately misleading.

I've answered that.  He gives people actual facts, data from Govt websites. 

At the time we were being bombarded with omicron fear porn.  3000-5000 deaths per day blah, blah, blah...  Using Govts own data he pointed out that less than 7% of deaths were with covid and covid admissions to hospitals were 70% less than this time last year.

Any deliberate misleading and fearmingering has been done by the Govt and media.  The media cos it sells and the Govt cos (and lets be generous) that they want to drive up vaccine uptake.  You can argue whether that is morally acceptable or not but I'd prefer actual data and informed choice.

Edited January 7, 2022 by maxjam

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

2 hours ago, i-Ram said:

To be fair, it must have been pretty difficult concentrating on COVID planning when the redecoration of your flat was so problematic. At least all ended well. Every cloud.

That looks like one of those magic eye pictures.  

 

1 hour ago, Bob The Badger said:

I wish I'd read this before I responded to your other post because it's utter nonsense.

Pretty much what @ariotofmyown said would be my take.

I'll add that Johnson said over 60% of people in hospital haven't been jabbed and 91% in intensive care haven't been.

When you think that over 80% of the population have been vaccinated, those stats are worrying.

With omicron, I don't think (or rather hope) anybody is saying you cannot catch it after being vaccinated (if they are then they are wrong), just you're a lot less likely to get seriously sick or die.

The more seriously ill you are, the longer you are off work and if you're a health worker that puts more pressure on other health workers.

And dead people rarely make it into work.

It would seem you were a lot less likely to catch the delta variant, but clearly omicron is more virulent and people are catching it in greater numbers.

If you can point me to any scientific studies that say you're just as likely to catch omicron if you have been vaccinated as if you haven't, please do so. I was under the impression that this was still unknown.

You do seem to really struggle to keep your eye on the ball and roll with new evidence and changes in the virus make-up.

Preferring instead to just search for anything anybody ever said about covid and mapping it over to fit your version of reality whether it's out of date, or irrelevant.

At my wife's hospital they are currently 120 hours down when it comes to ambulance drivers because of Covid. I have no ducking clue what being 120 hours down means and she hasn't answered me, but I know she is concerned with things because it's heavily impacting the entire hospital.

I assume it basically means working an average 10 hr day they would be missing 12 drivers.

[angieram]

How many days after first positive is that, Sage?

[Bob The Badger]

i bet she feels as silly as the 41-year-old ex-world champion kickboxer who died recently.

46 and certainly doesn't look overweight, although she was unvaccinated. 

California prosecutor who campaigned against vaccine mandates dies of Covid.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/06/kelly-ernby-california-prosecutor-dies-covid

[maxjam]

20 hours ago, Eddie said:

Not exactly. The FDA said that, with their current workload and staffing levels, it would take them 55 years to redact all of the Pfizer documentation.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/paramount-importance-judge-orders-fda-hasten-release-pfizer-vaccine-docs-2022-01-07/

They now have 8 months to release the data.

Pfizer are still moaning about not enough employees ? They might have to dip into some of that $30bn or however much it is they have earned in the past couple of years to hire some more people!

[PistoldPete]

1 minute ago, Bob The Badger said:

i bet she feels as silly as the 41-year-old ex-world champion kickboxer who died recently.

46 and certainly doesn't look overweight, although she was unvaccinated. 

California prosecutor who campaigned against vaccine mandates dies of Covid.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/06/kelly-ernby-california-prosecutor-dies-covid

She has got her freedom now, free from all life’s troubles.

[PistoldPete]

48 minutes ago, Archied said:

Those above 60 and with co morbidity s ,

take a look at the stats of who are dying from covid in any great numbers,

I also think mass vaccination is very much likely to produce variants

All Those who are over 60 ? And all those with comorbidities? So that’s about 30 million people in the Uk?

Edited January 7, 2022 by PistoldPete

[Boycie]

1 hour ago, sage said:

Hallelujah 

Long covid effects eye sight according to ex footballer Nick Pickering.

[Bob The Badger]

16 minutes ago, maxjam said:

I've answered that.  He gives people actual facts, data from Govt websites. 

At the time we were being bombarded with omicron fear porn.  3000-5000 deaths per day blah, blah, blah...  Using Govts own data he pointed out that less than 7% of deaths were with covid and covid admissions to hospitals were 70% less than this time last year.

Any deliberate misleading and fearmingering has been done by the Govt and media.  The media cos it sells and the Govt cos (and lets be generous) that they want to drive up vaccine uptake.  You can argue whether that is morally acceptable or not but I'd prefer actual data and informed choice.

I looked at his Twitter profile a couple of weeks ago and he was the antithesis of objective.

He's cherry picking data to support his position in the same way as others are on the opposite side. 

I'm just finishing up Rutherford and Fry’s Complete Guide to Absolutely Everything, an absolutely brilliant book that explodes a lot of myths, explains a lot of things that I had no clue about and all done with a lot of humour by scientists.

They explain that data is useless if you don't understand fully how to interpret it (and most people don't) and if you only take the bits that support your belief.

This guy is running around looking for stuff that out of context and in isolation looks like everything you're being told is wrong.

It's not hard to do that and just because he's smart doesn't mean he's objective, or has the scientific training to fully understand what's going on.

The hard part is to look for data that contradicts what you believe.

It's an actual fact that a glass of red wine has medicinal benefits.

It's also an actual fact that alcohol is a carcinogenic poison and those benefits can be gained by eating a few blueberries or walnuts without the downsides.

It's also a fact that he's a statistician and not a scientist.

[PistoldPete]

18 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said:

I looked at his Twitter profile a couple of weeks ago and he was the antithesis of objective.

He's cherry picking data to support his position in the same way as others are on the opposite side. 

I'm just finishing up Rutherford and Fry’s Complete Guide to Absolutely Everything, an absolutely brilliant book that explodes a lot of myths, explains a lot of things that I had no clue about and all done with a lot of humour by scientists.

They explain that data is useless if you don't understand fully how to interpret it (and most people don't) and if you only take the bits that support your belief.

This guy is running around looking for stuff that out of context and in isolation looks like everything you're being told is wrong.

It's not hard to do that and just because he's smart doesn't mean he's objective, or has the scientific training to fully understand what's going on.

The hard part is to look for data that contradicts what you believe.

It's an actual fact that a glass of red wine has medicinal benefits.

It's also an actual fact that alcohol is a carcinogenic poison and those benefits can be gained by eating a few blueberries or walnuts without the downsides.

It's also a fact that he's a statistician and not a scientist.

Pretty much what I said. He’s quoting facts and stats completely out of context and in a very misleading way. 

[maxjam]

10 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said:

I looked at his Twitter profile a couple of weeks ago and he was the antithesis of objective.

He's cherry picking data to support his position in the same way as others are on the opposite side. 

I'm just finishing up Rutherford and Fry’s Complete Guide to Absolutely Everything, an absolutely brilliant book that explodes a lot of myths, explains a lot of things that I had no clue about and all done with a lot of humour by scientists.

They explain that data is useless if you don't understand fully how to interpret it (and most people don't) and if you only take the bits that support your belief.

This guy is running around looking for stuff that out of context and in isolation looks like everything you're being told is wrong.

It's not hard to do that and just because he's smart doesn't mean he's objective, or has the scientific training to fully understand what's going on.

The hard part is to look for data that contradicts what you believe.

It's an actual fact that a glass of red wine has medicinal benefits.

It's also an actual fact that alcohol is a carcinogenic poison and those benefits can be gained by eating a few blueberries or walnuts without the downsides.

It's also a fact that he's a statistician and not a scientist.

I've been using Govt data to counter the narrative being pushed by politicans and the media for months.  It is nice to see a qualified award-winning analyst back up my findings. 

You can argue he has an agenda and only uses data to counter the mainstream narrative - but there is a lot of it to counter.  So long as its being done accurately I don't care whether he has a motive or not. 

The stats he produces are from the Govt website and if those are what you go looking for to back up your beliefs then thats on you, not the guy producing the stats.   I personally think most people know that covid is dangerous and other than those blindly pro/anti-vax the vast majority just want some accurate data to base decisions on rather than living in constant fear promoted by the Govt and media.

It is far more dangerous imo having Govt ministers go on TV and repeatedly pass off incorrect data as fact.  Not only does that scare and influence the public but these are the people that make lockdown decisions etc.  If they believe incorrect data and the public demand action based off incorrect data we'll never get out of this mess.

[sage]

35 minutes ago, Boycie said:

Long covid effects eye sight according to ex footballer Nick Pickering.

Steve Cross told me it was your hearing. 

At least that's what I think he said. 

[maxjam]

3 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

Pretty much what I said. He’s quoting facts and stats completely out of context and in a very misleading way. 

Jamie Jenkins has 50k followers on twitter, would you have heard of him if I hadn't started posting his stats on here?

The media has direct access to everyones house and has been routinely fearmongering for the past couple of years.  During the past month or so since I stumbled across Jamie's twitter, he has corrected numerous Govt ministers, who we are supposed to rely upon and make decisions on our behalf, who constantly got the data wrong and repeat it as fact. 

Who is taking data out of context in a very misleading way?

[PistoldPete]

17 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Jamie Jenkins has 50k followers on twitter, would you have heard of him if I hadn't started posting his stats on here?

The media has direct access to everyones house and has been routinely fearmongering for the past couple of years.  During the past month or so since I stumbled across Jamie's twitter, he has corrected numerous Govt ministers, who we are supposed to rely upon and make decisions on our behalf, who constantly got the data wrong and repeat it as fact. 

Who is taking data out of context in a very misleading way?

Jenkins is misleading. How is quoting excess numbers of people dying at home from Non covid causes not misleading? When you don’t also point out that far fewer people are dying in hospitals. So the obvious explanation is that families would rather that a dying relative dies at home surrounded by their families instead of alone in a hospital . Plus they could catch Covid which would really finish them off. 
 

yet instead he just quotes the excess figure. Along with another stat about non covid deaths. Just pure agenda driven misleading guff.

[therealhantsram]

1 hour ago, Bob The Badger said:

i bet she feels as silly as the 41-year-old ex-world champion kickboxer who died recently.

46 and certainly doesn't look overweight, although she was unvaccinated. 

California prosecutor who campaigned against vaccine mandates dies of Covid.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/06/kelly-ernby-california-prosecutor-dies-covid

I just feel sorry for her family and people like her who have become so brainwashed by the RWM that they would rather give up their lives than listen to the science.

[maxjam]

 

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

Jenkins is misleading. How is quoting excess numbers of people dying at home from Non covid causes not misleading? When you don’t also point out that far fewer people are dying in hospitals. So the obvious explanation is that families would rather that a dying relative dies at home surrounded by their families instead of alone in a hospital . Plus they could catch Covid which would really finish them off. 
 

yet instead he just quotes the excess figure. Along with another stat about non covid deaths. Just pure agenda driven misleading guff.

You still haven't replied as to why the Govt and media are misleading the public on a regular basis.  Instead you seem to want to project what others do on a regular basis to Jamie Jenkins quoting actual Govt statistics.

Jamie Jenkins posts data.  Actual data from the Govt website.  He's not a Govt official or media personality that blindly states '90% of people...' that never get officially challenged or 'fact checked' despite thousands of complaints to Ofcom.  He posts actual reliable data.  He may or may not have an opinion,  we all do,  but that doesn't change the data and at least his opinion is based on fact rather than made up statistics that are being erroneously force fed us on a daily basis.

Furthermore in many of his posts he adds disclaimers such as this one at the bottom and has mentioned numerous times that he is double vaxxed and pro-vaccine.  So much for misleading guff.

Edited January 7, 2022 by maxjam