(11-09-2020, 04:21 PM)billybassett Wrote:

(11-09-2020, 03:51 PM)baggy1 Wrote:

(11-09-2020, 03:32 PM)billybassett Wrote: Vaccine progress is being made and that will be great for vulnerable groups. Looks like it was based on the first 100 or so Covid sufferers with 40K participants.

The trouble is the success criteria have yet to be clearly published and we've no idea yet of the demography or health of those who participated. I'm assuming this will be published so it can be replicated.

As an aside when the govt got asked for the list of people on the UK Vaccine Task force it redacted all their names. Hard to judge whether there are any conflicts from that (although reports on the head of this task force over the weekend may lean us in one direction). I'm sure Mr Vallance is very happy mind.

On other news excess deaths in line for this time of year (although strangely 80% of the excess are deaths at home not hospital) and I quote "the ICU/HDU rate for influenza was at 0.00 per 100,000 in week 42 (based on data reported from 110 NHS Trusts) and there were two influenza (2 influenza A(unknown subtype)) confirmed ICU/HDU admissions.". Similar for many weeks. So I think we can officially agree we have cured Flu.

Also revised data out this weekend showed "cases" dropping from start of October. Making even more ludicrous the lockdown we are now in.

Billy, don't want to pull you up on this but you spoil informative posts such as this with obvious bullshit tin foil hat quotes. Out of the 10,739 deaths in week 43 how did you decide which ones were the excess deaths in order to measure those as home / hospital?

Surely the measurement should be in week 43 in 2020 x were at home and y were in hospital, compared with 2019 is was....

And as for curing flu, surely you mean that only 2 people have gone to hospital with into ICU or HCU. Not that we have cured it, just people with flu haven't gone to hospital. and don't want to offer a separate view but chances are people could have both Covid and Flu but your statement is meant to undermine the validity of Covid because of the narrative.

Other than that I agree with a lot of your post but take the tin foil hat off mate, you don't need it. And chances are, they've got the demography of health of those who participated covered, but they would probably welcome your input, i'd give them a ring if I were you - could your missus patch you through?   (that was a joke btw and a bit of teasing)

No tin foil hat just the data and the graphs from the usual govt sites



Flu cured was a tease as well don't you know....trying to get people to understand the madness of just PCR testing for testing sake. I mean Liverpool "case" rate was dropping before the local lockdown and now it's low they've decided the army should go in and start testing kids in school with a view to the whole city tested. I find this extraordinarily chilling - the motives and mindset are clear.

(11-09-2020, 04:21 PM)baggy1 Wrote: Hadn't even considered that PB, good shout. According to those in on the conspiracy, Lloyds Pharmacy, it's between December and March but occasionally can be as early as October. Another myth thrown out https://lloydspharmacy.com/blogs/cold-and-flu/when-is-flu-season

(11-09-2020, 04:35 PM)baggiebuckster Wrote: What is the purpose of doing this mass testing?

The people being tested are standing in queues which contain both those with symptoms and those without so surely this runs the risk of people who are fine getting infected going for a test. They won't test positive that day but how many days does that 'negative test' hold good for?

Look at the Albion for example - Pereira and Ivanovic played football last Monday evening yet tested positive for Covid on Tuesday. So did they just get up on Tuesday with Covid? How many days before a match are the players tested? Surely there is every chance that they had it whilst playing against Fulham.

To me it seems like a massive waste of money for something that only gives an indication at a set point in time. Especially when the tests used are 96% accurate. So when Boris gets up to his 10 million people a day being tested that will equate to just the 400k being falsely told to isolate. They of course will be isolating for 14 days so on a rolling scale we will see in the region of 5 million people isolating at any given time.

(11-09-2020, 04:32 PM)billybassett Wrote: "Ok I'll bite, why?" - baggy1

For me it's the thought process I find chilling:

You see covid cases falling
You see other respiratory illness cases non existent
You are experts in immunology 101 so you know about TCells, immunity etc

Yet you then decide to send the army into this place to find the virus - for what purpose?

(11-09-2020, 04:42 PM)billybassett Wrote:

(11-09-2020, 04:35 PM)baggiebuckster Wrote: What is the purpose of doing this mass testing?

The people being tested are standing in queues which contain both those with symptoms and those without so surely this runs the risk of people who are fine getting infected going for a test. They won't test positive that day but how many days does that 'negative test' hold good for?

Look at the Albion for example - Pereira and Ivanovic played football last Monday evening yet tested positive for Covid on Tuesday. So did they just get up on Tuesday with Covid? How many days before a match are the players tested? Surely there is every chance that they had it whilst playing against Fulham.

To me it seems like a massive waste of money for something that only gives an indication at a set point in time. Especially when the tests used are 96% accurate. So when Boris gets up to his 10 million people a day being tested that will equate to just the 400k being falsely told to isolate. They of course will be isolating for 14 days so on a rolling scale we will see in the region of 5 million people isolating at any given time.

It's worse than that. 32,970,188 tests have already been done. Must be a whacking great percentage of the population tested at some point - probably 30-40%.

It's not solved a thing has it. Why? The test is at maximum 30% accurate and I'm being very very generous. But when you've ordered 30m tests at a cost of £400m then you must use them mustn't you? Got to keep the contracts and revenue streams flowing.

If it was smallpox then yes testing/isolating etc But it's a bad flu.

I read an interesting scientific piece about the tradewinds circulating respiratory viruses and how they chase around the world in a certain pattern. The point being you can't control it with lockdowns, masks, social distancing or hand washing. All you do is delay the inevitable until the community reaches the necessary immunity level.

(11-09-2020, 12:38 PM)baggy1 Wrote: Good news indeed - saved us from a fake virus apparently 

The Deep state is probably injecting trackers into us.

(11-09-2020, 04:42 PM)billybassett Wrote: If it was smallpox then yes testing/isolating etc But it's a bad flu.

(11-09-2020, 07:04 PM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: Is this just a bad flu? If the answer received is yes walk away from the person saying it. Preferably as quickly as possibly as they’re probably refusing to wear a mask and have protest to go to.

(11-09-2020, 05:10 PM)baggy1 Wrote:

(11-09-2020, 04:32 PM)billybassett Wrote: "Ok I'll bite, why?" - baggy1

For me it's the thought process I find chilling:

You see covid cases falling
You see other respiratory illness cases non existent
You are experts in immunology 101 so you know about TCells, immunity etc

Yet you then decide to send the army into this place to find the virus - for what purpose?

Scale - we have a load of military personnel that can help out by carrying out the testing. It frees up the local teams and NHS to get on with what they do best, whilst the relatively low skill testing is carried out in volume to speed up the process. No conspiracy.

---

(11-09-2020, 04:42 PM)billybassett Wrote:

(11-09-2020, 04:35 PM)baggiebuckster Wrote: What is the purpose of doing this mass testing?

The people being tested are standing in queues which contain both those with symptoms and those without so surely this runs the risk of people who are fine getting infected going for a test. They won't test positive that day but how many days does that 'negative test' hold good for?

Look at the Albion for example - Pereira and Ivanovic played football last Monday evening yet tested positive for Covid on Tuesday. So did they just get up on Tuesday with Covid? How many days before a match are the players tested? Surely there is every chance that they had it whilst playing against Fulham.

To me it seems like a massive waste of money for something that only gives an indication at a set point in time. Especially when the tests used are 96% accurate. So when Boris gets up to his 10 million people a day being tested that will equate to just the 400k being falsely told to isolate. They of course will be isolating for 14 days so on a rolling scale we will see in the region of 5 million people isolating at any given time.

It's worse than that. 32,970,188 tests have already been done. Must be a whacking great percentage of the population tested at some point - probably 30-40%.

It's not solved a thing has it. Why? The test is at maximum 30% accurate and I'm being very very generous. But when you've ordered 30m tests at a cost of £400m then you must use them mustn't you? Got to keep the contracts and revenue streams flowing.

If it was smallpox then yes testing/isolating etc But it's a bad flu.

I read an interesting scientific piece about the tradewinds circulating respiratory viruses and how they chase around the world in a certain pattern. The point being you can't control it with lockdowns, masks, social distancing or hand washing. All you do is delay the inevitable until the community reaches the necessary immunity level.

Those are tests completed not people, some people will be tested multiple times (medical staff, those in hospital etc.) - in a population of 65M, there have been 32M tests and possibly less than 16M of those different people, we simply don't know because the politicians refuse to answer the question. It could be as low as 10% and as high as 50%, i'd be erring on the side of about 20%.

And it's not a bad flu FFS, when have we ever had an excess death total of 66k in this country? And what was the highest excess death total caused by flu?