The UK response - Part II - read OP

Peregrinus

partyguinness wrote: »

Now, it is well known that the COVID figures are rather inflated with hospital sticking down C19 no matter what to speed up the release of bodies.

Plenty of first hand stories from families of people heading to A&E dying of heart attacks etc and terminally ill cancer patients finding C19 listed on the death cert. Families calling BS on that...

Friends of mine are nurses who work in C19 wards saying that the figures and situation is nowhere near as bad as it comes across on the media.

Just had an interesting conversation here in the UK with a chap whose brother is a doctor in the local hospital. Basically, the local hospital trust gets £35k per positive C19 death....well, that is interesting.

What's even more interesting is that people repeat this stuff, and believe it.

Got any more credible source than an unnamed chap somewhere in the UK whose brother is a doctor?

agoodpunt

Peregrinus wrote: »

What's even more interesting is that people repeat this stuff, and believe it.

Got any more credible source than an unnamed chap somewhere in the UK whose brother is a doctor?

Anybody who suggests what and others I suspect there is a leaning to maybe put an old age death to covid who going to dare challenge it?
I do not believe the numbers rolled out on the daily RTE news stopped looking long ago.


Anyone who dosent agree is a conspiracy theorist or right wing anti masker.
We have a poor zero covid govt opp and a badly managed broken HSE who dont have the trust of most people.
UK has shown strengths from it initial short comings by having strong goverence and a health service both lacking here.

Peregrinus

agoodpunt wrote: »

Anybody who suggests what and others I suspect there is a leaning to maybe put an old age death to covid who going to dare challenge it?
I do not believe the numbers rolled out on the daily RTE news stopped looking long ago.

Anyone who dosent agree is a conspiracy theorist or right wing anti masker.

To be fair, you're doing your best to make yourself look like a conspiracy theorist. By your own account, you don't believe the figures because you have a suspicion, backed apparently by zero information or evidence, that they may be cooked. You may not be a conspiracy theorist, but isn't your position on this exactly the position that a conspiracy theorist would adopt?

agoodpunt wrote: »

We have a poor zero covid govt opp and a badly managed broken HSE who dont have the trust of most people.
UK has shown strengths from it initial short comings by having strong goverence and a health service both lacking here.

Partyguinness is saying that the UK figures are rigged. You're saying no, the UK has a sound system, even though the UK would have exactly the same incentives that gives rise to your suspicions as exist in Ireland.

No offence, but I don't get the impression that a lot of deep thought has gone into this.

beggars_bush

RobMc59 wrote: »

Classic whataboutry doesn't change the fact that the UK strategy regarding vaccines has been first class.

Lets see what happens when they have shortages of the vacccine

They've only given 700k second doses

Peregrinus

beggars_bush wrote: »

Lets see what happens when they have shortages of the vacccine

They've only given 700k second doses

They have shortages of the vaccine right now. But they are still expected to administer all the second doses on schedule, becaus they have enough for that, and they prioritise second doses over first doses. It's the people expecting a first dose who will be affected by the shortages.

A Dub in Glasgo

I got my letter yesterday, getting the 1st dose next week. My wife got her 1st dose last week

Peregrinus

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I got my letter yesterday, getting the 1st dose next week. My wife got her 1st dose last week

Reportedly, the constraint on supply doesn't kick in until the end of March, so it's the next cohort - the people who would otherwise have had a first dose in April/May - who will feel the brunt of this.

agoodpunt

Peregrinus wrote: »

To be fair, you're doing your best to make yourself look like a conspiracy theorist. By your own account, you don't believe the figures because you have a suspicion, backed apparently by zero information or evidence, that they may be cooked. You may not be a conspiracy theorist, but isn't your position on this exactly the position that a conspiracy theorist would adopt?

There is no way to independently verify the figures given by the HSE some deaths recorded may also have had terminal illness, old age and flu

I had a false positive PCR was recorded only 2 weeks later by the HSE so i have skin in the game


Some countries SEA have under reported are chinese figures believable so I not saying we are alone my zero trust of the HSE dosent make me a conpiracy theorist.

gutenberg

beggars_bush wrote: »

Lets see what happens when they have shortages of the vacccine

They've only given 700k second doses

According to the government dashboard, there have been almost 1.8 million second doses given.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations

beggars_bush

beggars_bush wrote: »

Lets see what happens when they have shortages of the vacccine

They've only given 700k second doses

give or take the odd million https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations

Peregrinus

agoodpunt wrote: »

There is no way to independently verify the figures given by the HSE some deaths recorded may also have had terminal illness, old age and flu

There's no way to independently verify the figures for deaths from any cause; there never has been. That's not much of a reason to suddenly start doubting the figures for deaths from a particular cause.

You can (in time) check Covid death figures against excess death figures, when they become available. If all that's happening is that people who have actually died of other terminal conditions are having their deaths attributed to Covid, you won't expect total deaths to rise, and the number of Covid deaths registered should be balanced by a corresponding reduction in flu, etc, deaths registered. So you can compare total deaths for the period of the pandemic with deaths recorded for the same period in previous years.

This requires a bit of adjustment, because other factors affect death rates (like the weather). And measures taken in response to the pandemic also affect deaths from other causes. (We've had many fewer cases of, and deaths from, flu this year because, big surprise, social distancing to guard against Covid transmission is also effective against flu transmission.) So it takes a while before really robust excess death figures can be compiled. But, for what it's worth, both HIQA and CSO (who compile their figures separately) are reporting evidence of significant excess deaths in 2020 on a pattern which matches the pattern of the pandemic.

It's true that some of those recorded as Covid deaths may have had other conditions, But that, again, could be said about all deaths; there's no particular reason to single out Covid deaths. Deaths with multiple conditions are pretty standard.

agoodpunt wrote: »

I had a false positive PCR was recorded only 2 weeks later by the HSE so i have skin in the game.

I'm afraid I've no idea what PCR is. But as you're not dead I'm not sure that this single data point says anything terribly meaningful about the robustness of HSE cause-of-death figures.

agoodpunt wrote: »

Some countries SEA have under reported are chinese figures believable so I not saying we are alone my zero trust of the HSE dosent make me a conpiracy theorist.

No, I'm not saying that you're a conspiracy theorist; I'm sure you're not. Just that the reasons you offer for doubting the the death figures are pretty much the reasons that conspiracy theorists offer.

S.M.B.

Agree with the above. Unfortunately there is no perfect way to record the figures we'd all like to know. Earlier in the pandemic I had issues with how these numbers were being gathered and reported (numbers were being downplayed). I think the current process is also flawed and unfortunately open for manipulation/exaggeration. There is no silver bullet for recording/reporting this data though.

The big difference between me and many others is that I don't use those concerns as some stepping stone to some much bigger outrage.

partyguinness

Peregrinus wrote: »

What's even more interesting is that people repeat this stuff, and believe it.

Got any more credible source than an unnamed chap somewhere in the UK whose brother is a doctor?

Now, if you think I am going to start listing personal names and hospitals on a public forum you are in the wrong place.

Off hand I can list out and personally name at least 8 different nurses, A&E consultants and doctors that have sat in front of me (not to mention the various second hand stores) and have confirmed this position on multiple occasions. The conversation yesterday is in a similar vain to direct conversations I have had with senior medical staff. In my line of work I interact with consultants and doctors of a daily basis. I have no reason whatsoever to doubt their veracity- these are not some BS conversations around the watercooler in a call centre.

If you hear it once or twice sure you can dismiss/ignore it. But when it is repeated by frontline medical personal straight from the horses mouth so to speak many times over the course of 12 months then it becomes harder to ignore. Unless of course you take the view that several unconnected frontline medical personal have all somehow conspired to spread/confirm/reconfirm the same BS story just for the sake it. That is your choice.

Make of it what you will.

partyguinness

Peregrinus wrote: »

Partyguinness is saying that the UK figures are rigged. You're saying no, the UK has a sound system, even though the UK would have exactly the same incentives that gives rise to your suspicions as exist in Ireland.

I think 'loose' would be a better word than 'rigged'.

So we are clear, the UK record those that have died within 28 days of having tested positive for Covid. That does not mean the person died from Covid.

How much of a factor Covid was in that person's death is anyone's guess. Covid may not have been a contibuting factor all but equally it may have been a significant factor.

serfboard

gutenberg wrote: »

According to the government dashboard, there have been almost 1.8 million second doses given.

So, 3% of the UK's population have been fully vaccinated.

About the same percentage as Ireland.

gutenberg

serfboard wrote: »

So, 3% of the UK's population have been fully vaccinated.

About the same percentage as Ireland.

Yep. I think the UK's policy of leaving 12 weeks between first and second doses is well known, with a huge drive in the last few months to get people their first dose.

Donald Trump

agoodpunt wrote: »

Anybody who suggests what and others I suspect there is a leaning to maybe put an old age death to covid who going to dare challenge it?
I do not believe the numbers rolled out on the daily RTE news stopped looking long ago.


Anyone who dosent agree is a conspiracy theorist or right wing anti masker.
We have a poor zero covid govt opp and a badly managed broken HSE who dont have the trust of most people.
UK has shown strengths from it initial short comings by having strong goverence and a health service both lacking here.

Do you not know that the UK hit a cumulative total of around 100k excess deaths between last March and the end of 2020?


I suppose that next we'll hear how the lizard people in control of the NHS have a hit team of modern-day Harold Shipmans that they decided to send out to assassinate those 100k people so that they could control the population.


Or maybe over the last 5 or 6 decades those same lizard people created false birth certs and life-stories for 100k people so that they could "erase" them in 2020. Playing the long game perhaps?


Edit:

Link to excess death figures https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores?country=GBR

Enzokk

partyguinness wrote: »

Now, if you think I am going to start listing personal names and hospitals on a public forum you are in the wrong place.

Off hand I can list out and personally name at least 8 different nurses, A&E consultants and doctors that have sat in front of me (not to mention the various second hand stores) and have confirmed this position on multiple occasions. The conversation yesterday is in a similar vain to direct conversations I have had with senior medical staff. In my line of work I interact with consultants and doctors of a daily basis. I have no reason whatsoever to doubt their veracity- these are not some BS conversations around the watercooler in a call centre.

If you hear it once or twice sure you can dismiss/ignore it. But when it is repeated by frontline medical personal straight from the horses mouth so to speak many times over the course of 12 months then it becomes harder to ignore. Unless of course you take the view that several unconnected frontline medical personal have all somehow conspired to spread/confirm/reconfirm the same BS story just for the sake it. That is your choice.

Make of it what you will.

I am calling this out, its a conspiracy theory. Because once we go down the rabbit hole of who is actually asking for the numbers to be inflated it becomes crazy. Is it the NHS? Or the DHSC? Matt Hancock? Boris Johnson? Weird that I am calling crap on someone calling into question the current state in the UK...right? That is how crazy that theory is.

gutenberg wrote: »

Yep. I think the UK's policy of leaving 12 weeks between first and second doses is well known, with a huge drive in the last few months to get people their first dose.

We have the same policy for AZ. Your second dose will be done 12 weeks later, I guess we are just giving more Pfizer than the UK has.

Getting your COVID-19 vaccine

Your COVID-19 vaccine appointments
You will get your COVID-19 vaccine as an injection in your upper arm. It will only take a few minutes.

You will need 2 doses.

Your second dose will be at least:

84 days (12 full weeks) after your first dose if you get the AstraZeneca vaccine – use of this vaccine is temporarily paused

Peregrinus wrote: »

There's no way to independently verify the figures for deaths from any cause; there never has been. That's not much of a reason to suddenly start doubting the figures for deaths from a particular cause.

You can (in time) check Covid death figures against excess death figures, when they become available. If all that's happening is that people who have actually died of other terminal conditions are having their deaths attributed to Covid, you won't expect total deaths to rise, and the number of Covid deaths registered should be balanced by a corresponding reduction in flu, etc, deaths registered. So you can compare total deaths for the period of the pandemic with deaths recorded for the same period in previous years.

This requires a bit of adjustment, because other factors affect death rates (like the weather). And measures taken in response to the pandemic also affect deaths from other causes. (We've had many fewer cases of, and deaths from, flu this year because, big surprise, social distancing to guard against Covid transmission is also effective against flu transmission.) So it takes a while before really robust excess death figures can be compiled. But, for what it's worth, both HIQA and CSO (who compile their figures separately) are reporting evidence of significant excess deaths in 2020 on a pattern which matches the pattern of the pandemic.

It's true that some of those recorded as Covid deaths may have had other conditions, But that, again, could be said about all deaths; there's no particular reason to single out Covid deaths. Deaths with multiple conditions are pretty standard.


I'm afraid I've no idea what PCR is. But as you're not dead I'm not sure that this single data point says anything terribly meaningful about the robustness of HSE cause-of-death figures.


No, I'm not saying that you're a conspiracy theorist; I'm sure you're not. Just that the reasons you offer for doubting the the death figures are pretty much the reasons that conspiracy theorists offer.

And you have to take into account services for people that may have lived longer but do not have access to those services. But then there is less road deaths because there are less people on the road. It is impossible to be 100% accurate, but that there has been excess deaths in countries who had high Covid infection rates seems rather undisputed. That anyone will think to question that most of those excess deaths are due to Covid is conspiracy thinking. You are too kind to not call someone calling it into question a conspiracy theorist, but I have no such qualms.

Now I am sure some will try to justify it by saying that they have not said all of the deaths, but then they have to quantify exactly how many of the excess deaths are not due to Covid. Because they apparently know there are deaths being misreported so they should have an idea what number they are talking about.

partyguinness

Enzokk wrote: »

I am calling this out, its a conspiracy theory. Because once we go down the rabbit hole of who is actually asking for the numbers to be inflated it becomes crazy. Is it the NHS? Or the DHSC? Matt Hancock? Boris Johnson? Weird that I am calling crap on someone calling into question the current state in the UK...right? That is how crazy that theory is.

"calling out"- that is just a recent Americanism for "I don't believe it".

You are "calling" out what exactly? You don't believe it...why?...sorry let me guess...because you can't find it on Google. Right you are.

So several unconnected frontline medical personnal for some weird unknown reason are conspiring to say to my face and others that "It is bad of course but it is really is not as bad as it comes across in the media"- they are basically lying to my face. That is a weird position to take.

You see I rely on good old fashioned first hand accounts- not Google. I appreciate that any sort of comment or point of view that does not tow the official line is immediately shouted down as a mad "conspiracy" theory. A bit sad really.

Have you ever considered the possibility that there may be a kernal of truth in it? Is your mind not open to that possibility? You are quite quick to "call" it out as BS but yet you are in more better position than me to go around "calling" BS on anything. The irony.

Do I add more weight to personal conversations with experienced medical staff than a Google search and the media? Damn right I do and I make no apology for that.

It would be interesting to see what your response would be if medical staff are saying to your face that "All ain't what it seems"- would you stand there and accuse them of spreading conspiracy theories and "call BS" to their faces armed with nothing more than a Google search? I doubt it. We are all big men behind the keyboard "calling BS" on all manner of points we don't agree with.

Ultimately it is no skin off my nose-I don't need validation from random internet strangers when I speak to frontline medical staff everyday (who are in your head spreading conspiracy theories straight off their shifts in the Covid Ward).

As I said, make of it what you will. You don't agree with it. Fine.

S.M.B.

I don't have any issue with anybody questioning the validity of figures, as I said earlier, it's not so long ago that they were being underplayed for the self interest of some so why would the opposite not be possible?

I do find that those who shout the loudest about these inaccuracies are often prone to taking a few leaps down the rabbit hole when trying to explain the rationale for the inflated numbers.

brickster69

serfboard wrote: »

So, 3% of the UK's population have been fully vaccinated.

About the same percentage as Ireland.

Yes, but over 25 million are protected from serious disease, hospitalization and death.

gutenberg

Enzokk wrote: »

We have the same policy for AZ. Your second dose will be done 12 weeks later, I guess we are just giving more Pfizer than the UK has.

Yes I know. My dad has received the AZ vaccine in Dublin, while my husband has also received AZ, in the U.K., and both will wait 12 weeks for the second dose.

I believe the U.K. has administered something like 11 million Pfizer doses and 12 million AZ doses (couldn’t find the exact numbers but it was something like that a few days ago). So more AZ sure, but plenty of Pfizer. Unlike elsewhere in Europe though, there’s a 12-week gap for Pfizer too in the U.K. I understand.

AllForIt

Certain people are desperate to say the UK have the worst covid death rates.

It must be really hard for them to take that the UK have one of the best vaccine rollouts and certainly better than any EU country.

This is all so hilarious in the context of Brexit.

What will happen is the real facts will come out in the end when this is over.

The suspension of the AZ vaccine was extremely suspect. No politics at all? Just healthcare concerns? I doubt it given where we are.

Wolf359f

AllForIt wrote: »

Certain people are desperate to say the UK have the worst covid death rates.

It must be really hard for them to take that the UK have one of the best vaccine rollouts and certainly better than any EU country.

This is all so hilarious in the context of Brexit.

What will happen is the real facts will come out in the end when this is over.

The suspension of the AZ vaccine was extremely suspect. No politics at all? Just healthcare concerns? I doubt it given where we are.

Well on the AZ issues, the EU confirmed over a dozen rare brain clots while the UK said they experienced none.... Then when the EMA was investigating it, low and behold the UK found 5 such cases. Now if they were open and honest, we could have ruled out any manufacturing issue, but they did't decide to be up front until AZ was paused in many countries. It kinda forced their hand.

After the EMA investigation, the UK issues new guidelines for people to look out for, bleeding, headaches after 4 days etc... had the EMA now intervened, would the UK have added those guidelines? If you want to get political, I suggest looking at the UK first. If this was all political against the UK (can't get political with a company) why did the UK add guidelines to their AZ vaccine rollout?

beggars_bush

AllForIt wrote: »

Certain people are desperate to say the UK have the worst covid death rates.

It must be really hard for them to take that the UK have one of the best vaccine rollouts and certainly better than any EU country.

This is all so hilarious in the context of Brexit.

What will happen is the real facts will come out in the end when this is over.

The suspension of the AZ vaccine was extremely suspect. No politics at all? Just healthcare concerns? I doubt it given where we are.

The uk haven't been allowing vaccine exports to the eu. But yet have been getting supplies from factories in the uk.

josip

BBC chucking stones around in that glass house of theirs again today.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56521318

EU states have seen some of the deadliest outbreaks of the pandemic, with Italy recording more than 106,000 deaths, France 93,000, Germany 75,000 and Spain 73,000.

robinph

josip wrote: »

BBC chucking stones around in that glass house of theirs again today.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56521318

Article about Europe mentions rates of deaths from Covid in various European countries shocker.

What should they have written instead to give context? The UK rate compared with South Korea?

josip

robinph wrote: »

Article about Europe mentions rates of deaths from Covid in various European countries shocker.

What should they have written instead to give context? The UK rate compared with South Korea?

Perhaps this,

EU states have seen some of the deadliest outbreaks of the pandemic, with Italy recording more than 106,000 deaths, France 93,000, Germany 75,000 and Spain 73,000 although all are significantly less than the UK's 126,000 deaths.

robinph

josip wrote: »

Perhaps this,

Why not mention the rate in Brazil instead then?

Whilst 70k can be said to be "significantly less" than 126k, I don't thing you can make the same claim for 106K.

Other than your desire to have the UK shamed at every opportunity, they know that they have a high death rate and have done rubbish at everything up until the vaccinations, is there any reason for needing the UK rate mentioned in an article specifically about the level of vaccinations in EU countries?

BonnieSituation

robinph wrote: »

Why not mention the rate in Brazil instead then?

Whilst 70k can be said to be "significantly less" than 126k, I don't thing you can make the same claim for 106K.

Other than your desire to have the UK shamed at every opportunity, they know that they have a high death rate and have done rubbish at everything up until the vaccinations, is there any reason for needing the UK rate mentioned in an article specifically about the level of vaccinations in EU countries?

Well, unless the initial 'B' in the name of the organisation means Brazilian then I think it's obvious why josip made the point he did.