Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

921

CNN, BBC, NBC say so! Hum, lets look at https://ourworldindata.org/covid-deaths Compare with let say France and Italy. Hum, well that is interesting.

CNN, BBC, NBC say so! Hum, lets look at https://ourworldindata.org/covid-deaths Compare with let say France and Italy. Hum, well that is interesting.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (97).
[–] • 0 pt

Aah I see.

Since we don’t have two copies of the UK, we only have the one data set to go off of.

However, the three infection spikes are all display different spread rates and different peak sizes. If a downward trend in the spikes occurred naturally, all three spikes would display similarities to each other, but they don’t.

All of them curbed their trends downwards as the three lockdowns were put into place, which suggests it is the lockdown restrictions that caused this and not a natural occurrence.

The same trends can also be observed in different countries.

[–] • 0 pt

That’s a good point, but again, I can’t draw any conclusions from that because there’s no control study. Anecdotal evidence is not scientific proof.

[–] • 0 pt

The UK gov did experiment with regional restrictions during lockdown 2 but it just wasn’t working, so I guess the data you’re after is out there but just not publicly available.

You could always ask for it using a freedom of information request, however the world’s data suggests that lockdowns and the measures put in place do in fact prevent the spread of airborne diseases as the infection rates always drop after stringent lockdown measures.

[–] • 0 pt

Perhaps, but if this information is being withheld for a public health crisis, it suggests something is wrong with it.

I have to stick to my original points. Without a control group, without normalizing the other data for time, temperatures, etc., without accurate and reliable diagnostic methods, without the hysteria of calling everything a COVID case and every death a COVID death - the numbers are simply bullshit.

If you want to base an argument on something, that’s fine but don’t do it on faulty testing methodology.

[–] • 0 pt

Remember that PCR threshold has been quietly lowered from 45 cycles average to 32 cycle average, and now after mass vaccinations you can expect PCR threshold to once again drop. This has the effect of reducing positive results, false or otherwise.

If you make your testing methodology more strict, you will have less cases by virtue of fewer values falling into range.

[–] • 0 pt

I’m basing my conclusions on the death rates and the infection rates, not just the latter. Both follow the same trend so we can exclude PCR test numbers as a possible variable.

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

I don't think we can so simply. Remember that a lot of people were pushed to the brink due to these lockdowns. We still have not been able to measure the human cost of shutting down everything. A lot of suicides from people who lost everything, a lot of people dying because hospital services were not available, the list goes on and on. It's little surprise we would have additional mortality from that alone, and obfuscates what the disease itself was responsible for.

*edit Then consider that a lot of people might not have died had they NOT gotten intubated or treated at the hospital. I had a nasty version of COVID last year I almost went to the emergency room because I was a little short on breath. Instead my doctor prescribed me a steroid inhaler, which I didn't even end up using. I think NOT going to the hospital and letting them operate on me kept me alive.