Ed Corona Virus Conspiracy Theories....

[bignickel]

Johns Hopkins Study Mysteriously Disappears after it Revealed, In Spite of COVID, No More Deaths in 2020 Than In Prior Years
Briand was quoted in the article as saying, “All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers.” This claim is incorrect and does not take into account the spike in raw death count from all causes compared to previous
https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19

Ha ha, no, try John Hopkins university STUDENT paper. With an article filled with inaccuracies. That the paper retracted but took pains to still make available for those who care to read it.

https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/...johns-hopkins-student-paper-not-censored.html

 

[Jack by the hedge]

These vaccines have not been tested in the long term nor in the short term.

Well the virus hasn't existed for that long so I guess the long term claim, though pointless, isn't actually false, but the short term claim is just a flat out lie.

 

[bruto]

Given that Covid carries with it a pretty significant likelihood of a nasty bout, and a non-trivial risk of death, I am trying to imagine what "1000 times" the harm from a vaccine would be. It's clearly a fearsome prospect, with evidence here that among the most susceptible, merely contemplating it causes brain death.

 

[Craig4]

People should be wary of any experimental vaccines we are offered and ask questions before getting vaccinated. It is possible that they cause serious health problems 1,000 times worse than catching Covid. These vaccines have not been tested in the long term nor in the short term. The media will not denounce this filth that puts people's lives in danger for fear of feeding the so-called conspirators and seeing the state's anti-Covid advertising funds cut off. The more it goes, the more corruption. Money cost lifes.

Where did you go to medical school? Maybe you're a microbiologist? I notice you didn't link any studies to support your argument by assertion. Why do you think it's right for people with no medical training and no education in biology who don't cite evidence to give medical advice?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Given that Covid carries with it a pretty significant likelihood of a nasty bout, and a non-trivial risk of death, I am trying to imagine what "1000 times" the harm from a vaccine would be. It's clearly a fearsome prospect, with evidence here that among the most susceptible, merely contemplating it causes brain death.

Mortality rate for COVID is what, about 2%? So 1000 times the harm would be: if I get vaccinated not only am I guaranteed to die but also I'll take 20 unvaccinated people with me!

 

[dudalb]

The media should stop spreading information about the pharmas vaccine that would be 95% or 100% effective because they are falsehoods to raise the price of shares and sell them for a profit. The truth is that a vaccine against Covid is not at all effective, 0%, since you have to be vaccinated every 4 months with a product that gives Alzheimer's or Parkinson's.


The Chinese treat people with influenza with plants and vitamins, and they have 1,000 times fewer deaths. To have an optimum intake of vitamin C, an elderly person should eat a dozen oranges per day and to have a minimum intake of vitamin D, the person should spend at least 20 minutes per day in the sun with their arms uncovered, so these are two essential elements for immunity and it is not the noodles with tomato sauce and the little cake that we give to the elderly with a worn out digestive system that are going to be useful to them. They have to take supplements.


For doctors, all plants or vitamins are useless since they are not products that pharmas can patent and resell at a high price. Our doctors are trained by a corrupt system to sell pharmaceutical drugs that kill huge numbers of people. You take like sleeping pills, they cause between 300,000 and 500,000 deaths in the United States per year, twice as many as covid, why doesn't the media count them one by one?


If you do your studies you will find that the health and containment measures against covid are going and have caused more deaths than doing nothing. Older people are the victims of a corrupt health care system that leads them to suffering and death.

My BS meter just exploded.

 

[dudalb]

Where did you go to medical school? Maybe you're a microbiologist? I notice you didn't link any studies to support your argument by assertion. Why do you think it's right for people with no medical training and no education in biology who don't cite evidence to give medical advice?

Same place where Jenny McCarthy did.

 

[EHocking]

My BS meter just exploded.

I’m not usually given over to Americanisms, but that’s not so much as BS as completely whackadoodle

 

[JesseCuster]

The Chinese treat people with influenza with plants and vitamins, and they have 1,000 times fewer deaths.

Influenza kills 20,000 - 60,000 Americans every year. China has a population about 4 times that of the USA, so if the rate of influenza deaths in China was the same as in the USA, you'd expect 80,000 - 250,000 deaths per year. If your claim was true, then China must only experience 80 - 250 influenza related deaths per year.

Can you back up this claim from a reliable source that China typically only has at most a couple of hundred people die from influenza each year?

 

[Wudang]

Link to Lancet PDF
https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lanpub/PIIS2468-2667(19)30163-X.pdf

Findings We fitted the linear regression model with the data from 22 of 31 provinces in mainland China, representing 83·0% of the total population. We estimated that an annual mean of 88100 (95% CI 84200–92000) influenza-associatedexcess respiratory deaths occurred in China in the 5 years studied, corresponding to 8·2% (95% CI 7·9–8·6) of respiratory deaths. The mean excess respiratory mortality rates per 100000 person-seasons for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2), and B viruses were 1·6 (95% CI 1·5–1·7), 2·6 (2·4–2·8), and 2·3 (2·1–2·5), respectively. Estimated excess respiratory mortality rates per 100000 person-seasons were 1·5 (95% CI 1·1–1·9) for individuals younger than 60 years and 38·5 (36·8–40·2) for individuals aged 60 years or older. Approximately 71000 (95% CI 67 800–74 100) influenza-associated excess respiratory deaths occurred in individuals aged 60 years or older, corresponding to 80% of such deaths.

 

[JesseCuster]

So China doesn't have 1,000 less times flu mortality than the USA...

 

[dann]

Bolsonaro warns Brazilians against the vaccine:

This time he said that vaccine which is being developed by Pfizer-BioNTech could turn people into 'crocodiles' or 'bearded ladies', depending on what people would think is the worst.
'If you turn into a crocodile...': Brazil President Jair Bolsonaro on Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine side effects (freepressjournal.in)

 

[dudalb]

Conspiracy theories already exploding about the mutated strain of Covid that is breaking out in Britian.
CHina is responsible , of course.

 

[EHocking]

Conspiracy theories already exploding about the mutated strain of Covid that is breaking out in Britian.

It is not helpful that the government of Britain seems to be the main distributor of misinformation, claiming it is 70% more infectious than other strains.
There is no scientific evidence for this.
When the South Australia gov tried the same ******** to cover up their poor response to an outbreak there, multiple virologists and researchers pointed out the ******** for what it was.

It is stupid scaremongering by a government to try to get people to take action because the government’s own response was/is inadequate.

CHina is responsible , of course.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

It is not helpful that the government of Britain seems to be the main distributor of misinformation, claiming it is 70% more infectious than other strains.
There is no scientific evidence for this.
When the South Australia gov tried the same ******** to cover up their poor response to an outbreak there, multiple virologists and researchers pointed out the ******** for what it was.

It is stupid scaremongering by a government to try to get people to take action because the government’s own response was/is inadequate.

That article doesn't say the new mutation isn't 70% more infectious. It says that '70% more infectious' hasn't been nailed down and that other unpublished studies have estimated higher and lower figures.

But, yes, it is stupid scaremongering from a government. It is intended to get people to follow the rules. Not for any health/safety reasons but merely to exert control and determine exactly how much ******** the public will submit to before they revolt.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

That article doesn't say the new mutation isn't 70% more infectious. It says that '70% more infectious' hasn't been nailed down and that other unpublished studies have estimated higher and lower figures.



But, yes, it is stupid scaremongering from a government. It is intended to get people to follow the rules. Not for any health/safety reasons but merely to exert control and determine exactly how much ******** the public will submit to before they revolt.

Muh freedumb!

 

[EHocking]

That article doesn't say the new mutation isn't 70% more infectious. It says that '70% more infectious' hasn't been nailed down and that other unpublished studies have estimated higher and lower figures.

But, yes, it is stupid scaremongering from a government. It is intended to get people to follow the rules. Not for any health/safety reasons but merely to exert control and determine exactly how much ******** the public will submit to before they revolt.

Keep calm and carry on, except . . .

“The new variant is out of control and we need to bring it under control,” Matt Hancock, the health secretary, told the BBC. He urged his countrymen to “act like you have the virus.”​

 

[turingtest]

That article doesn't say the new mutation isn't 70% more infectious. It says that '70% more infectious' hasn't been nailed down and that other unpublished studies have estimated higher and lower figures.

But, yes, it is stupid scaremongering from a government. It is intended to get people to follow the rules. Not for any health/safety reasons but merely to exert control and determine exactly how much ******** the public will submit to before they revolt.

As opposed to stupid scaremongering about a government...

 

[Cosmic Yak]

But, yes, it is stupid scaremongering from a government. It is intended to get people to follow the rules. Not for any health/safety reasons but merely to exert control and determine exactly how much ******** the public will submit to before they revolt.

Evidence for this assertion, please, preferably from the minutes of the Cabinet meetings where such a plan would have been spelled out.

 

[smartcooky]

I have an issue with the data given on this website, and I would appreciate any comment as to whether or not I have this wrong... i.e. am I missing something here?

https://www.coronatracker.com/country/united-states/

This data changes daily, but at the time of posting

18,503,154 Confirmed cases (+29,438 new cases)

10,808,834 Recovered

327,313 Deaths

1.8% Fatality Rate (of total cases)

58.4% Recovery Rate (of total cases)​

... in particular, its the significance of the last two figures I am questioning. Even though it clearly states "of total cases" people who don't understand the maths here, or look only at the percentages, could still come away with the wrong impression.

For mine, those rates should be calculated by looking at the total number of people who have had the disease, and either recovered or died, i.e. the total number of concluded cases (recovered + deaths) with the death rate being the latter as a percentage of the concluded cases, and the recovery rate being the former as a percentage of them.

The total number of concluded cases is 11,156,147 (10,808,834 + 327,313)

Of these

327,313 have died, so the death rate is really 327,313/11,156,147 * 100 = 2.93%

10,808,834 have recovered so the recovery rate is really 10,808,834/11,156,147 * 100 = 97.07%

If this is correct, then to me it looks like the number of deaths is heading for a huge total. The number of unconcluded cases is 7347007 (18,503,154 - 11,156,147) and statistically, 2.93% of those will die - that's 215,267.

If we imagined no new cases from today onwards then the total death toll would be over 552,000, but in reality the new cases each day adds even more.