Cyprus-Forum.com

[repulsewarrior]

...the second wave,

https://www.terradaily.com/reports/Chin ... s_999.html

[Tim Drayton]

So I will ask you once more simply and plainly - do you believe that covid-19 has caused less weekly deaths in the UK to date than RTAs in the UK ?

No.

Thank you.

But you do believe that globally there have been more weekly RTA deaths in last few weeks than covid-19 ones ? Or have I misunderstood you ?

sorry I am editing this second question - the above one is the wrong question.

But you do believe that globally over the course of a year from when pandemic started there will be more deaths from RTA's than covid-19 ?

I think my point has been misunderstood, and perhaps it is my fault for not making it clear enough, so let me have another go. I was using road deaths as an example of other kinds of death.

Let us take the latest official Covid death toll of 282,000 at face value. Covid hysteria has been going on for about three months*. About 60 million people die annually worldwide. So, let's say 15 million died of other causes over this three-month period. The precise figures are debatable. What is beyond dispute is that a vastly greater number of people have died over this period from other causes than from Covid.

This being so, my question would be: why do 282,000 deaths warrant blanket media coverage to the extent of blocking out coverage of all other news, while 20,000,000 deaths that occurred in the same period are deemed non-news?

A related question: why do 282,000 deaths warrant measures of unprecedented severity that trample on fundamental human and constitutional rights, end democracy and introduce a police state and will cause a depression of a magnitude last seen in the 1930's, when 20,000,000 deaths do not warrant such drastic intervention?

* Just by way of note, there is a body evidence which suggests this virus was already doing the rounds for several months before the Chinese government leapt on it as a pretext for placing the population of Wuhan under house arrest (some claim this was to halt anti-pollution protests that were building up in the city), so for months this flu-like virus was infecting people and causing flu-like symptoms and nobody was any the wiser. Then all of a sudden the hysteria broke out!

[Tim Drayton]

And, yes, I have no doubt that, globally, more people will end up having died in road accidents than from Covid this year, even using the deliberately inflated official figures for Covid deaths.

[erolz66]

I think my point has been misunderstood, and perhaps it is my fault for not making it clear enough, so let me have another go. I was using road deaths as an example of other kinds of death.

Let us take the latest official Covid death toll of 282,000 at face value. Covid hysteria has been going on for about three months*. About 60 million people die annually worldwide. So, let's say 15 million died of other causes over this three-month period. The precise figures are debatable. What is beyond dispute is that a vastly greater number of people have died over this period from other causes than from Covid.

I hear what you are saying but do you not think taking global figures at this stage for such a 'look' has problems. Would it be invalid to look at the UK where we have good numbers, whilst understanding that as a country it is currently an outlier ? In the UK the number of people dying in a given week has been over double what would be 'normal' for those weeks. Yes it is unclear exactly how many of this excess is directly from covid-19 itself and yes it is also unclear how that excess will affect coming weeks, with some of the current excess being people that 'died early' (a few week early). However these ARE dramatic numbers are they not ? Over double as many people dying in the last 2 week in England and Wales as is normal.

I am not saying that there is no exaggeration or hysteria in the media. For me this is a 'do bears shit in the woods' thing. This is how the media works. This is how it has always worked. I do not really understand what is to be gained by 'zooming in' on this right now in terms of better understanding. What I am trying to understand is how bad this thing is. I am not going first to the 'media' to do this. I go first to the numbers. Is this not what is necessary given we live in a world where the media 'is what it is' ? I would like all discussion to start 'with the hard numbers' first because media bias and sensationalism exists. Because I believe the defence against this is to start with what is know as fact or as close to fact and work out from there. The ONS numbers are NOT the media. The numbers on total deaths all causes are not 'sensationalist' and not 'distorted'.

I accept that the UK is on the 'worse' end of the scale of countries and that my 'focus' on the UK is in part because of than, just as people with different perspectives to me will often focus on 'global numbers' instead. However it is not my only reason why I focus on the UK. I am from and of the UK, I understand it and it does have some of the best hard numbers in the world. We are good at counting such things. There is no language barrier. I would like to have some serious discussion that starts with the ONS total death numbers and works out from there to try and make the 'important guesses' that are then needed from these numbers as impartially as possible, like how many of the excess are caused by what. It feels to me that we have not even spent any time doing that. That we never get off the 'top level' or zoom in , using just the numbers we have and our own collective thinking. That we are just stuck on a zoomed out, partisan discussion on 'the virus is bad' vs 'the virus is not that bad its just media making us think it is' and never progressing from there.

The issue of how many excess deaths in UK ONS figures are explained in what ways is, for me a vital and important thing I want to understand better via discussion with those who have different views from me. All we get however is 'some will be from this or that' without discussion that so often feels to me to not be about trying to investigate that and understand it but is simply just used as a means of supporting or denying the over all narrative of 'this is bad' or 'this is not as bad as most people think'. I want to get past that. One example, in the face of claims of 'the excess is not from covid-19' and is from 'other things', without investigation and only giving examples of things that could have added to the excess death figure, I ask in my head the question what about the other side of scale, are there things that could be leading to reducing the excess death figure as well as adding to it. I at first imagined that RTA's that have not happened because of the response to the outbreak might be one such thing. However having 'on my own' gone and looked for figures, motivated by still investigating the 'top level' positions and arguments (its bad, it s not so bad) I now understand that this is not a factor of any significance when trying to zoom in on the excess death figures and making best guesses about those. This kind of understanding could have been reached so much quicker imo by group effort and discussion if we had of moved on from the 'its bad' vs 'its not as bad as everyone says' arguments.

I would like to think we could actually have a serious discussion here that looks to 'zoom in' on the things we should be seeking to understand better, like what makes up the excess death figures in the ONS numbers, that actually could lead to better understanding for me and others. That starts with the numbers and the hard numbers and NOT media reports about them or anything else. However if all I am faced with is a barrage of 'experts' that start with claims like 'this virus is no different from regular flu outbreaks we see every few years' then I and we can not get down to any serious zoomed in looking at excess deaths, because such a claim just is not compatible with the excess deaths figures we have. In the face of such things all we can do is keep having the same essentially pointless (imo) arguments at the zoomed out top level of 'its bad' vs 'its not as bad as everyone thinks because of media exaggeration'. Frustrating.

[Paphitis]

And, yes, I have no doubt that, globally, more people will end up having died in road accidents than from Covid this year, even using the deliberately inflated official figures for Covid deaths.

And yet they haven't banned cars or motor vehicles and yet Chy-na Virus means lock down. Go figure!

Imagine what would happen to all the fuel company if motor vehicles couldn't move around, or even the motor industry.

And yet, shutting Mum and Dad's little corner cafe is OK for the greater good. One rule for Mum and Dad's little cafe, and another rule for Shell, BP, Caltex, Mercedes, BMW, Toyota and Ford.

It's always the worker, and families that make the biggest sacrifice, and nothing at all for the big end of town other than stupid videos of these miserable sods crying in the multi million dollar mansions in Hollywood.

Yeh the big end of town can just watch Netflix and not worry about their next dollar.

Thank fully Tim, a lot of people are awake to what is going on. They are much more aware than they ever were. It's not like before.

[cyprusgrump]

I think my point has been misunderstood, and perhaps it is my fault for not making it clear enough, so let me have another go. I was using road deaths as an example of other kinds of death.

Your point was perfectly clear and well made Tim...

Unfortunately some posters have made their mind up that FluManChu is deadly and Lockdown therefore essential even though the World-wide numbers don't support it. No evidence presented from scientists, virologists or epidemiologists is going to change their mind...

Unfortunately, when all you have is an ONS Hammer everything looks like a nail!

[Tim Drayton]

...

Thank fully Tim, a lot of people are awake to what is going on. They are much more aware than they ever were. It's not like before.

Yes, while still a tiny minority, the attendance keeps growing at regular Saturday anti-lockdown, pro-constitutional rights, demonstrations being held throughout Germany.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/thousands-p ... ss-germany

[erolz66]

Latest ONS figures are in. Thankfully the number of excess deaths in week 18 is 'only' 8K higher than would be expected vs 5 year averages and not the 11k odd it was for previous two weeks 16 and 17.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... ndandwales

[Tim Drayton]

Latest ONS figures are in. Thankfully the number of excess deaths in week 18 is 'only' 8K higher than would be expected vs 5 year averages and not the 11k odd it was for previous two weeks 16 and 17.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... ndandwales

From the same source, there were 6,000 Covid deaths in the same week. What accounts for the other 2,000 excess deaths?

[erolz66]

Latest ONS figures are in. Thankfully the number of excess deaths in week 18 is 'only' 8K higher than would be expected vs 5 year averages and not the 11k odd it was for previous two weeks 16 and 17.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... ndandwales

From the same source, there were 6,000 Covid deaths in the same week. What accounts for the other 2,000 excess deaths?

I do not know. I would welcome grown up discussion of that far more than barrages of experts estimating unknown things like fatality rates or R numbers who concluded 'this is no worse than regular periodic flu outbreaks we get every 5 or ten years'.

What I do know is that the difference between the hard fact number of total deaths all causes and the guess number of deaths from covid-19 is not simply - these are therefore deaths caused by lock down. I know that of the two sets of numbers one is know fact and the other is and can only be 'guessed opinion'. I would welcome any discussion that looks the question 'how many of the known fact excess deaths in ONS figures are direct covid-19 deaths and how many are not' if we agree to start with what is known as fact and not just seek to try and make out it is not fact when it is.