Diversity and Inclusion Charter

[Gaffer 1,665]

43 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

Seriously?

 

Actuaries will predict all sorts of things depending on what mortality table they pick on that day and they're usually wrong

 

Proves that lockdown is working.

 

There are people who have died whose cause of death hasn't been detailed as Covid bit it probably is. The covid deaths are underestimated.

 

Yes, they are.

Post deleted.

 

Edited July 15, 2020 by Gaffer
Sometimes there's no point

[Bluedell 5,624]

6 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

So much for rationale debate.  But congratulations on getting so many factually incorrect statements into one post.  Where do you get your insights ... the Daily Record?  I'd welcome any example of evidence for your statements.  I've given mine.

You  really haven't given yours.

 

You claim to have talked to some unnamed NHS people (I've talked to some who contradict what you've said).

 

You've made claims about actuarial figures but not given a source and don't explain what mortality rate table the were using (it can have a big impact on the results as I'm sure you know). You haven't looked at overall deaths to compare what the actual level is excluding Covid deaths (which of course aren't Covid.

 

You've claimed Covid deaths aren't caused by Covid but given no evidence. You've made spurious claims about it all being a hoax.

 

Anyway, what exactually did I say that was "factually" incorrect?

 

That actuaries can come up with different results depending on what mortality table they use? What is factually incorrect about that?

 

That actuaries are usually wrong? I've had dealings with actuaries for 25 years and what they produce are estimates that are usually off the mark. They would be the first to admit it as things change. If you wish to dispute that they are usually wrong then knock yourself out but I could produce plenty of actuarial reports that turn out to be totally different from what actually happened. That includes medium term mortality rates which can vary significantly (short term mortality rates are just a crap shoot anyway).

 

Are you suggesting that the hospitals are empty because lockdown isn't working? 

 

Are you suggesting that nobody has died of covid that hasn't been reported as covid?

 

Do you know the meaning of "factually"?

 

 

[Bluedell 5,624]

18 hours ago, Gaffer said:

I don't want to stray too much off topic 

Admittedly I may have been wrong about this.

[Gaffer 1,665]

4 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

Admittedly I may have been wrong about this.

I was wondering why you'd be a moderator as it clearly wasn't based on your ability to engage in rational debate.  But now I know .. it's down to your incredible wit.  You win though.  You've closed me down.  ??????

[Rousseau 10,600]

13 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

I was wondering why you'd be a moderator as it clearly wasn't based on your ability to engage in rational debate.  But now I know .. it's down to your incredible wit.  You win though.  You've closed me down.  ??????

Playing the man? I thought you were better than that. 

 

You've made some big claims, surely you can provide some evidence? 

 

I'm intrigued. 

[Gaffer 1,665]

13 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

Playing the man? I thought you were better than that. 

 

You've made some big claims, surely you can provide some evidence? 

 

I'm intrigued. 

I gave you facts about the numbers.  You can check them.  I told you about personal experience and why this is so important to me to find out the truth.  Bluedell responded in a childish manner (in my opinion) and I reacted.  I'll just leave it for a while because I'm not getting the feeling that anyone else is interested or bothered - which is fine.  Good luck.  Cheers.

[Gonzo79 15,292]

News reports are suggesting face masks will be compulsory in shops until 2021.  Will we have to wear them at football matches, if we get to attend them before the end of the year?

 

With the constant one-sided politicising of our national sport and probable consequences (of Covid-19) in store for those who attend matches (small crowds, social distancing, hand sanitisers and reduced capacity in nearby public houses etc.), I'm starting to think now might be a good time to walk away.

[bluedan 93]

9 hours ago, Gaffer said:

I'm so sorry to hear that but I completely understand.

Thanks. Sorry to hear you're going through something similar. 

Unfortunately for me I live in Australia and it's going to be hard to get out to come home. Working on it though. 

[Rousseau 10,600]

1 hour ago, Gaffer said:

I gave you facts about the numbers.  You can check them.  I told you about personal experience and why this is so important to me to find out the truth.  Bluedell responded in a childish manner (in my opinion) and I reacted.  I'll just leave it for a while because I'm not getting the feeling that anyone else is interested or bothered - which is fine.  Good luck.  Cheers.

You've provided un-sourced Flu numbers, but that's it, I think? I'm sorry you've been hit personally, but you're not alone, there. BD was clearly riled by your interpretation, but he can speak for himself.

 

As far as I can see, the following are your main posts, which kind of merge into each other:

 

Quote

Corona virus does exist because it's well documented over the past 70 years, but what I don't believe is that it's so much more dangerous than previous strains. There is now overwhelming evidence that the numbers are grossly exaggerated. The rate of infection and death rate is hugely exaggerated as is being proven by NHS whistleblowers.  People are dying with it, but most of them are not dying from it - they're dying of other chronic and pre-existing conditions.

 

Quote

Do you know how many people die each year because of flu in England?  It's about 17,000 and that remains fairly constant, although in 2015 it was more severe and almost 29,000 people died that year. There's a similar story for other respiratory conditions.  The actuaries have excellent data and have accurately predicted death rates over the past 20 years in particular.  They predicted many more deaths in 2020 but this was before anyone was talking about COVID 19.  They now have the challenge of predicting the devastating effects these restrictions will have on mortality rates in the future.

Quote

I have spoken to 6 fairly senior people in the NHS and they all fail to understand the rationale for the current guidance.  They've all been warned however about speaking out, in fact they've been threatened with being suspended if they do. I know it worries many people in the know in the NHS but they're not allowed to speak out.  

Quote

If what we are being told is the truth, why threaten and silence the NHS staff?  Wouldn't you agree that it's worth a closer look and possibly an independent investigation?  Surely that's the least we should ask for? I hope this scandal is exposed at some stage but by that stage the damage is already done.  I expect history will show that lockdown and social distancing killed more people and ruined more lives than the so called virus will.

According to WHO, there have been approximately 573,288 deaths from COVID-19 reported worldwide (as of July); and estimates that 290,000 to 650,000 people die of flu-related causes every year worldwide. 

 

The COVID-19 deaths cover 2-3 months. The Flu 'estimates' are based on 12 months.

 

Even if COVID-19 deaths are 'hugely exaggerated', the figures suggest it is clearly much more dangerous than the Flu.   

 

Moreover, there are Flu vaccines, of which a large proportion of the population get every year. There is no COVID-19 vaccine. There’s a lot we don’t know about COVID-19 — how it spreads, how it infects people, how it causes damage in the body, how the immune system responds to it, etc. Flu, on the other hand, has been around for a long time, so scientists and doctors know a lot about it, including the best way to treat people.

 

There was a source I saw that was as sceptical about the seriousness of COVID-19 as you are, which stated that around 21,000 died from flu every 'winter season' (5 months?), whereas around 9,000 had died from COVID-19 over around 2 months.  These figures suggest it's quite comparable. However, I believe these figures only include hospital deaths from COVID-19, so we can assume it is much more, as those in care homes etc. are more at risk. Moreover, lockdown has curtailed the spread, whereas the Flu spreads unrestricted. 

 

I don't see how you can claim it's not more dangerous than previous strains - even if the numbers are grossly exaggerated. 

 

BD challenged your Actuaries data quite thoroughly.

 

I can't comment on your claim that 'fairly senior NHS' staff are being threatened with suspension if they 'speak out', because it's just based on your word.   

 

I'm not an expert -- I've probably missed a lot -- but even a cursory look at the figures suggests your claims are spurious -- that sounds harsh, but at the very least you have a colourful interpretation. Someone more capable could do a better job at challenging your view, if you were willing. 

[Bill 13,717]

13 hours ago, Charloch said:

Well done GersNet on the freedom of speech front. I posted the same message that started this thread the same day on Follow Follow and they had me banned from the site within ten minutes. A badge I will wear with pride. Kudos to you. I only wanted to start a debate

I once used Follow Follow over ten years ago. I can’t remember why.