Deaths from Covid ALONE between Jan 1 2020 to 30/9/2021 only 17,371

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyclops

The main point is being missed here.

There is a difference between deaths WITH Covid and deaths FROM Covid.

---

In other news, it has been discovered that the earth isn’t flat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Huh?

What is being exposed here are the scaremongering tactics of governments.

Dr Campbell is demonstrating that there is a difference between dying FROM Covid than WITH Covid - in other words, deaths with "Covid" and deaths from "Covid" are completely different.

Therefore, the vaccination programme might have had target groups rather than attempting to jab everybody.

As a result of governments' propoganda, the general public, whether healthy or unhealthy, has been duped into a state of fear and panic about the effects of the pandemic and their responses to it have been devastating to the provision of surgical care. Many who have been monitoring excess deaths have suspected a skewing of the data but didn't have the last piece of the puzzle ie the low death rate from Covid alone.

There are sub-plots here. For example: 1) if this had been made plain, it might have encouraged those with co-morbidities that they could do something about (such as obesity) to address their condition. 2) The mental anguish induced by the blanket fear of contracting Covid might have been less severe among the healthy.

---

They're still deaths that wouldn't have happened had Covid not been here.

Jesus did I fall asleep and wake up in 2020? They literally announce deaths as "within 30 days of testing positive for Covid" - no one's trying to pretend that everybody who dies of Covid dies of Covid alone. Conspiracy garbage that was doing the rounds early on in the pandemic, what's next a 5g phone towers cause Covid thread?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

How is having a viewpoint on official ONS data a conspiracy. People are entitled to debate and question it without being closed down.

Every death from anything is tragic but the media should also give a balanced view to reassure the public. I hope there is a proper enquiry into this.

---

How is having a viewpoint on official NASA figures of men on the moon a conspiracy?

This thread is a classic example of people who don’t really know what they’re talking about seizing upon numbers that suit their own views and sensationalising them without checking their validity.

Cyclops has highlighted the fact that there were ONLY 17,371 deaths from Covid-19 ALONE in England and Wales between 1/1/20 and 30/9/21.

For balance, I have just Googled deaths from influenza ALONE in England and Wales. According to the ONS (the same source as the Covid-19 figure quoted above), the combined total for 2017, 2018 and 2019 was just 3,279.

That total can be broken down as 458 in 2017, 1,598 in 2018 and 1,223 in 2019.

Of course, the totals for influenza AND pneumonia are much larger - 29,516 in 2018 and 26,398 in 2019. But the totals for influenza ALONE are relatively small and considerably smaller than the totals for Covid-19 ALONE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Exactly, right from the start, there were a rump of people who refused to believe that Covid was the killer it has turned out to be (reading the early pages of the main Covid thread on here is very revealing in the cases of some contributors). In the last week, the UK has seen the highest number of Covid deaths in almost a year and still we get this pointless “with” or “from” Covid stuff - what does it matter? Over 150,000 people in this country have died in less than two years after catching Covid and, in every case, the virus was deemed to have played a part in the death - the UK’s figures are among the worst in Europe, I dread to think what they would have been like if we’d treated Covid as lightly as some on here said we should.

---

I agree with what you say except the part i highlighted.
covid is mentioned on the death certificate if it is present because it is a reportable disease/condition and the doctor is obliged to record it. I think the point people are trying to make is that some of these people would have died anyway.
Agreed some would have died later but their underlying conditions would have got them in the end. The only way we will know this is if the figures begin to show less deaths than historically in the next year or so. we cannot tell that now.
The other point is the number of people taking into hospital to be treated for covid and those that are/were admitted for some other cause and were then 'incidentally' found to give a positive test result for covid. If they die it is still recorded as a covid death, which would seem unreasonable. The number of 'incidental' covid sufferers in hospitals at the moment is very relevant when looking at the threat from the new virus. most of those people didn't even know they had it and showed no symptoms.
It leads some people to think that the NHS or whoever is collating this information is deliberately attempting to make it as scary as possible to inflate the need for restrictions. (Oh sorry Mr Drakeford.... protections)

Most people that die in this country have underlying health issues, usually some form of organ failure. Then they catch a virus of some sort and their body isn't strong enough for them to recover. If a brick landed on your head from a great height and you died then the cause of death would be multiple head Injuries. The brick wouldn't get a mention on the death certificate. I'm confusing myself now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Agreed some would have died later but their underlying conditions would have got them in the end. The only way we will know this is if the figures begin to show less deaths than historically in the next year or so. we cannot tell that now.

---

This is gibberish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

This is gibberish.

---

How is it gibberish when the average age of death with Covid is seven weeks lower compared to the average deaths (82.5) in normal circumstances?


Around three-quarters of deaths involving COVID-19 linked to a record of a positive test result (79.2% in England, Public Health England data, 70.4% in Wales, Public Health Wales data).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

This thread is a classic example of people who..... seizing upon numbers that suit their own views and sensationalising them without checking their validity.

---

Wow!
You KNOW this was my view before I saw the video.
That's uncanny!
As a matter of fact, I didn't have a view until yesterday.
Show me a post when I expressed that view.
You're whistling in the wind.
But you know best.
Just as you attempt to rubbish my books when you haven't read them.
And as regards checking the validity of what was revealed by Dr JC (a man with 2 million plus subscribers - some of whom post on here) I did check this and was satisfied on all counts.
You make yerself look foolish with these ungrounded assertions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Wow!
You KNOW this was my view before I saw the video.
That's uncanny!
As a matter of fact, I didn't have a view until yesterday.
Show me a post when I expressed that view.
You're whistling in the wind.
But you know best.
Just as you attempt to rubbish my books when you haven't read them.
And as regards checking the validity of what was revealed by Dr JC (a man with 2 million plus subscribers - some of whom post on here) I did check this and was satisfied on all counts.
You make yerself look foolish with these ungrounded assertions.

---

yeah you wouldn't want to make yourself look foolish posting about things you haven't fully understood would you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyclops

You make yerself look foolish with these ungrounded assertions.

---

It’s not me who is looking foolish in this thread, that’s for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Just as you attempt to rubbish my books when you haven't read them.

---

I appreciate your large but evidently fragile ego is bruised at present, but the truth is I haven’t rubbished your books at all. Not once. I’ve no idea what they are about and I’m unable to read them as you won’t reveal their titles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

This thread is a classic example of people who don’t really know what they’re talking about seizing upon numbers that suit their own views and sensationalising them without checking their validity.

Cyclops has highlighted the fact that there were ONLY 17,371 deaths from Covid-19 ALONE in England and Wales between 1/1/20 and 30/9/21.

For balance, I have just Googled deaths from influenza ALONE in England and Wales. According to the ONS (the same source as the Covid-19 figure quoted above), the combined total for 2017, 2018 and 2019 was just 3,279.

That total can be broken down as 458 in 2017, 1,598 in 2018 and 1,223 in 2019.

Of course, the totals for influenza AND pneumonia are much larger - 29,516 in 2018 and 26,398 in 2019. But the totals for influenza ALONE are relatively small and considerably smaller than the totals for Covid-19 ALONE.

---

Makes you wonder why Doctors are so worried about influenza, probably because many oldies develop pneumonia from it, just like cancer patients do, my old man did also. Any serious infection could bump you off with terminal cancer….

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goats

Makes you wonder why Doctors are so worried about influenza, probably because many oldies develop pneumonia from it, just like cancer patients do, my old man did also. Any serious infection could bump you off with terminal cancer….

---

Precisely. The current overview of pneumonia on the NHS website reads as follows:

“Pneumonia is swelling (inflammation) of the tissue in one or both of the lungs. It is usually caused by a bacterial infection. It can also be caused by a virus, such as Covid-19.”

It’s almost as if the Covid-19 virus weakens people, especially the elderly and those with pre-existing conditions, leaving them open to further medical complications and possible death.

Who’d have thought it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Wow!
You KNOW this was my view before I saw the video.
That's uncanny!
As a matter of fact, I didn't have a view until yesterday.
Show me a post when I expressed that view.
You're whistling in the wind.
But you know best.
Just as you attempt to rubbish my books when you haven't read them.
And as regards checking the validity of what was revealed by Dr JC (a man with 2 million plus subscribers - some of whom post on here) I did check this and was satisfied on all counts.
You make yerself look foolish with these ungrounded assertions.

---

Why do you always descend into personal attacks? You’ve apparently got your answers and enough information for an unwavering viewpoint. So why not rebuke people with the superior facts and knowledge you’ve got?
As for no of subscribers, there’s YouTube channels where kids review Lego toys with 10’s of millions of subscribers and 30yr olds who play video games all day with 50million+ subscribers.

People on YouTube have uploaded videos with hundreds and thousands of views claiming the earth is flat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Canton Kev

Why do you always descend into personal attacks? You’ve apparently got your answers and enough information for an unwavering viewpoint. So why not rebuke people with the superior facts and knowledge you’ve got?
As for no of subscribers, there’s YouTube channels where kids review Lego toys with 10’s of millions of subscribers and 30yr olds who play video games all day with 50million+ subscribers.

People on YouTube have uploaded videos with hundreds and thousands of views claiming the earth is flat.

---

High Covid death rates skewed by people who died from other causes, admits Sajid Javid

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...-virus-admits/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

High Covid death rates skewed by people who died from other causes, admits Sajid Javid

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...-virus-admits/

---

From what I can tell that’s mostly since Omicron. The ONS Covid death figures were higher than the official government ones until Omicron and then there was a flip, which is now what Javid is commenting on.

The crux of the issue I want to understand is 150k deaths came from somewhere. If not Covid, where?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

High Covid death rates skewed by people who died from other causes, admits Sajid Javid

---

This is also not a new development. I think most of us already knew this was the case.

Interesting graph halfway down the article you linked showing the average death rates for the last five years and the death rates in recent times. The excess deaths. Did you spot that one?

Yes I saw that too, that’s concerning, but this article from 2020 could explain it

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...-report-shows/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Yes I saw that too, that’s concerning, but this article from 2020 could explain it

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...-report-shows/

---

How do you think the article explains it?

Collateral damage from delays to healthcare , (25,000) 185,000 in the medium to long term - over 1m years of life lost.
It’s been proven that Poverty , mental health , fuel poverty , decline in social services support , would also have an impact but the list is not exhaustive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Collateral damage from delays to healthcare , (25,000) 185,000 in the medium to long term - over 1m years of life lost.
It’s been proven that Poverty , mental health , fuel poverty , decline in social services support , would also have an impact but the list is not exhaustive.

---

How could an estimate in a report of 185,000 deaths in the medium to long term explain the 150k excess deaths in the last couple of years?

185,000 is a knock in from collateral damage from withdraw/reallocation of healthcare services alone over the medium term

The other issues I’ve mentioned would also have a significant impact but there are plenty more as I’ve alluded to.
I guess it’s just my interpretation of the data available in relation to this thread and the links from the reports in the Daily Telegraph.
Unless you have a breakdown on the excess deaths you could argue either way but to assume it’s one factor is unrealistic and open to scrutiny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

185,000 is a knock in from collateral damage from withdraw/reallocation of healthcare services alone over the medium term

The other issues I’ve mentioned would also have a significant impact but there are plenty more as I’ve alluded to.
I guess it’s just my interpretation of the data available in relation to this thread and the links from the reports in the Daily Telegraph.
Unless you have a breakdown on the excess deaths you could argue either way.

---

Those effects aren't a given, they can be reduced by more spending in that area i.e. making sure that missed screening is caught up on.

Additionally, they aren't necessarily any better in a world where this is no lock down. If the virus had been allowed to run riot then there would have been a lot more missed appointments as the NHS wouldn't have been able to cope - this report from July 2020 at a time when there were voices within the govermnent suggesting a "herd immunity" approach fortunately doesn't seem to have ultimately had much creedence here or anywhere else

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

This is gibberish.

---

Why is it> The point is that many of the people who's underlying conditions made them susceptible to Covid may well have dies within 2 years anyway. So we need to see what the death rate is in the next 2 years to see if it is lower, than average thereby balancing out the figures. If after this time it is still higher I'd reckon that would give you a clearer view of the death rate purely due to covid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Why is it> The point is that many of the people who's underlying conditions made them susceptible to Covid may well have dies within 2 years anyway. So we need to see what the death rate is in the next 2 years to see if it is lower, than average thereby balancing out the figures. If after this time it is still higher I'd reckon that would give you a clearer view of the death rate purely due to covid.

---

Many people in their 80s will die within the next few years - does that mean you shouldn't help them now?

Should we not treat cancers in people over 85?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Those effects aren't a given, they can be reduced by more spending in that area i.e. making sure that missed screening is caught up on.

Additionally, they aren't necessarily any better in a world where this is no lock down. If the virus had been allowed to run riot then there would have been a lot more missed appointments as the NHS wouldn't have been able to cope - this report from July 2020 at a time when there were voices within the govermnent suggesting a "herd immunity" approach fortunately doesn't seem to have ultimately had much creedence here or anywhere else

---

Noted , but your assumption was based on SAGE modelling which time and time again has proved to be incorrect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Many people in their 80s will die within the next few years - does that mean you shouldn't help them now?

Should we not treat cancers in people over 85?

---

I agree with you entirely. i'm not in any way suggesting it is acceptable or good, but it may be a fact! that's all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TWGL1

Noted , but your assumption was based on SAGE modelling which time and time again has proved to be incorrect.

---

are you saying you genuinely think that we would have been better off if we hadn't bothered to lock down at all? because nobody with any credibility is saying that.

No I’m not saying that at all, but to attribute 150,000 excess deaths to one illness is open to debate especially with the data being filtered out.

so many facts and figures to digest my head is spinning :hehe:

nicked this from someone on twitter there has been an excess of 83k deaths since the pandemic started . An easy graph to show how many people have died throughout 2020 & 2021 showing covid and non covid deaths in England and Wales

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Excess deaths is 30% above the 5-year ave. Since pandemic started, an excess of 83.3k have been recorded.<br>Excess deaths is not exact fig but a better indicator of abnormal cause Deaths for any reason where patient had Covid in the last 28 days.<br>Source: ONS <a href="https://t.co/f9MJ8tBD5K">pic.twitter.com/f9MJ8tBD5K</a></p>&mdash; Bryan Milham (@BryanMilham) <a href="https://twitter.com/BryanMilham/status/1483575662577344513?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 18, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Why is it> The point is that many of the people who's underlying conditions made them susceptible to Covid may well have dies within 2 years anyway. So we need to see what the death rate is in the next 2 years to see if it is lower, than average thereby balancing out the figures. If after this time it is still higher I'd reckon that would give you a clearer view of the death rate purely due to covid.

---

If I understand you correctly, I don't understand you.

Everyone dies - most of us are agreed on that. Everyone dies just once - also generally agreed (not sure about Truthpaste!)

When a pandemic hits the excess death figures must be balanced at a later date by lower than normal death figures (allowing for the graph to adjust for changes to life expectancy etc). The impact of the pandemic when it comes to deaths is premature deaths.

I have no problem with the Covid death figures - where the measure is people who have died solely due to Covid (even then the actual cause of death will not be the virus) and those for whom underlying health factors were triggered by the virus bringing on severe illness and death that wouldn't have happened at that time.

Where excess deaths gets a bit difficult is where the 'collatoral damage' in a stressed health service leads to more deaths of people where the cause had nothing to do with Covid. Even then it is not a simple case of saying that Covid prevention measures and/or swamped hospitals caused those non-Covid deaths - in those cases where the Covid prevention measures didn't actually protect those vulnerable people.

As other posters have said the government could take other action to mitigate the impact - more/less restrictions, clearer advice and information, added screening capacity, having a pandemic emergency plan that was up to date and properly resourced, different budget choices.

I don't think there is any readily available data set for the UK that can separate those strands out. In the absence of that we get more circular arguments that go nowhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

If I understand you correctly, I don't understand you.

Everyone dies - most of us are agreed on that. Everyone dies just once - also generally agreed (not sure about Truthpaste!)

When a pandemic hits the excess death figures must be balanced at a later date by lower than normal death figures (allowing for the graph to adjust for changes to life expectancy etc). The impact of the pandemic when it comes to deaths is premature deaths.

I have no problem with the Covid death figures - where the measure is people who have died solely due to Covid (even then the actual cause of death will not be the virus) and those for whom underlying health factors were triggered by the virus bringing on severe illness and death that wouldn't have happened at that time.

Where excess deaths gets a bit difficult is where the 'collatoral damage' in a stressed health service leads to more deaths of people where the cause had nothing to do with Covid. Even then it is not a simple case of saying that Covid prevention measures and/or swamped hospitals caused those non-Covid deaths - in those cases where the Covid prevention measures didn't actually protect those vulnerable people.

As other posters have said the government could take other action to mitigate the impact - more/less restrictions, clearer advice and information, added screening capacity, having a pandemic emergency plan that was up to date and properly resourced, different budget choices.

I don't think there is any readily available data set for the UK that can separate those strands out. In the absence of that we get more circular arguments that go nowhere.

---

Again, I agree with you. One cannot disregard a person's death or say "He would have died anyway" for as you rightly point out we all die anyway.
Your comment about 'premature' deaths is the point.
If we now have a higher than historical death rate now since Mar 20 but over the same period going forward we have a lower than historical rate then that should give us more of a realistic idea of the excess deaths overall. It will suggest that certain vulnerable people who died may have died anyway in the following period, just that their death was sooner than expected. That is not a good thing of course but if you can imagine the death rate being affected by the virus like a wave, after a peak comes a trough and there is a mean line across both. Any residual excess deaths across the peak and trough will give a clearer picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Excess deaths is the statistic that you want to be looking at, and despite unprecedented restrictions on many aspects of daily life there have been a huge number of them in this country since th start of the pandemic.

---

Spot on !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

Many people in their 80s will die within the next few years - does that mean you shouldn't help them now?

Should we not treat cancers in people over 85?

---

Sometimes they can’t as the chemo is too much…..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

Why is it> The point is that many of the people who's underlying conditions made them susceptible to Covid may well have dies within 2 years anyway.

---

You're making a huge, totally unqualified assumption here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

You're making a huge, totally unqualified assumption here.

---

I'm not making any assumptions I said 'May have'. The point is only time will tell us, if the death rate does not fall below average then there might be an assumption that they would not have, and a lower than average death rate an indication that they might well have.
the point is that cannot be known until we see the numbers to balance against the last 20 odd months.
Its just about the numbers, nothing else about it can possibly be good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xsnaggle

I'm not making any assumptions I said 'May have'. The point is only time will tell us, if the death rate does not fall below average then there might be an assumption that they would not have, and a lower than average death rate an indication that they might well have.
the point is that cannot be known until we see the numbers to balance against the last 20 odd months.
Its just about the numbers, nothing else about it can possibly be good.

---

But deaths are well above average.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

But deaths are well above average.

---

Jesus christ how many times do I have to say this.
Deaths are above average now but you need to give time to see if the numbers in the same period going forward are down by the same amount. Only then will you know the real affect of the virus over and above the average.
It's like giving the result of a football match at half time!!
It's not about anything but simple mathematics.