Reuters tell us that Argentine leader Alberto Fernandez says he tests positive for the coronavirus…
He is white, male, 62 years old and he says he is in good health. He is the national leader, so presumably lives in a nice post code. Sounds like he has exactly the same risk profile as me (well, other than the national leader bit. If I was the UK’s national leader, there would scarcely be an unoccupied lamppost in Westminster).
So, using the Oxford University Covid-19 risk calculator, what chance does Alberto Fernandez have of snuffing it? Presumably the same as me if I get infected; which I did in March 2020 (spoiler – I am not posting this via Ouija board from beyond. Two weeks in bed, ten days more to get smell and taste back, done.). Therefore, unless he is telling porkies about being in otherwise good health:
(a) Absolute risk = 0.0256% 1 in 3,906
(b) Absolute risk with no risk factors = 0.0227% 1 in 4,405
In other words, I do not give a damn that the leader of Argentina has covid-19, and frankly neither should Alberto Fernandez. The only thing newsworthy about this article is that the utter scrotes who run Reuters want you to think this is newsworthy.
I urge everyone to use the Oxford University Covid-19 risk calculator and share your figures. Get your friends, family, co-workers, neighbours, even your enemies, to do likewise. Maybe, just maybe, your enemy will figure out you are not the one they should be annoyed at after all.
Get an informed idea if you are meaningfully at risk. And if you are, then you absolutely should isolate, protect yourself and take this seriously.
But if not, and you do not live with anyone who is seriously at risk… protest, argue, be difficult, make people demanding compliance work hard to force your compliance, organise covid speakeasy gatherings, send money to support Lockdown Sceptics and their ilk. Do something, almost anything is better than nothing, even if all you do is make it unmistakably clear that you are only complying due to coercion, in spite of thinking this whole thing is utter madness. And say it every time. Ask people if they have spent 60 seconds of their time to use the risk calculator, and if not, why not?
Throw a brick through the Overton window. Stand the fuck up for yourself.
The media have been busy condemning the President of Brazil – even though the policy he wanted (Early Treatment of Covid 19) was not followed (apart from in his own case – when he got Covid 19 he insisted on Early Treatment, and he was right to do so) – and the policy he did not want (lockdowns and masks) was followed by all States in Brazil – apart from two very remote and thinly populated States (where it is impossible to enforce any policy on anything).
According to the media the deaths in Brazil are due to the President of Brazil (although they are not – see above) – this is the same media which gloated when the man was stabbed (and almost died) during the election campaign. That was nothing to do with Covid 19 (it did not exist at the time) – the international establishment wanted the man to suffer and die (be knifed to death by a leftist) because they disagreed with his politics.
As for Argentina – like so many countries it has gone down the lockdown road, which is what the international community (as they call themselves) wanted.
Next door Uruguay did not lockdown – it closed the external borders instead. Although that is clearly not a permanent solution (how long do the borders stay closed?) it did (I have to admit) have good results, whereas lockdowns and so on do not work.
Argentina was already destroying itself (it has been since the 1940s – the SOCIAL JUSTICE agenda of Peron), Covid 19 just gave the opportunity to push forward the destruction even more.
As for Latin America generally – leftist Nicaragua essentially ignored Covid 19 (no lockdown – nothing much of anything), no doubt people have died there, but no one seriously suggests that the death rate in Nicaragua is anything like as bad as Britain and other lockdown countries.
In countries such as Nicaragua or Honduras (one country with a “left wing” government and its neighbour with a “right wing” government) if one gets ill, one goes to a doctor and they provide treatment.
The doctor will most likely want payment – but even by the standards of local wages (which are very low) the payment for Early Treatment of Covid 19 (the sort of Combination treatment that will save about 80% of people who would die without treatment) is not very high. And there are government health care systems in these countries who will actually treat some people for free – although there are the usual problems with bureaucracy and so on.
In some other countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, people who become ill are told to stay home till when (and if) they are taken to hospital. And there is a chant of “There Is No Early Treatment” (TINET) if anyone objects to the very large number of people who have died.
TINET seems to be very useful for the international establishment political agenda. Indeed the Gain of Function research in Wuhan is also very useful for the international establishment political agenda (including a big conference in Wuhan in 2019).
But one is not allowed to point any of this out – which is why I always do.
In Europe the Czech Republic “did everything right” according to the international establishment – lockdowns, masks and so on. With the exception of tiny San Marino the Czech Republic has the highest (highest – not lowest) Covid death rate in the world.
In South America there were also poster children for lockdowns – Peru and so on. It did not turn out well there either.
As for what we can do, as my own Member of Parliament says “I vote against the Emergency Powers, I speak against the Emergency Powers – what else do you want me to do?”
David Davis (who some of us supported against David Cameron long ago) often suggests alternative policies in the House of Commons – but even his suggestion of increasing Vitamin D levels (which would reduce life threatening development of the disease by 50%) is met by the response “we follow expert advice”.
Everything, every objection to existing policy and suggestions for alternative policies, is met by the response of “we follow expert advice”.
To which the response of “then get different experts” is met with a baffled look from the Prime Minister and other ministers. It is actually worse in the United States – where dissent is met by savage attacks.
Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. A painfully honest man – he really does not fit into this world at all, he reminds me of the iron maker “Mr Wheat” in a novel of Theodore Dreiser – I do not think “Mr Wheat” actually speaks in the novel, because Mr Dreiser had trouble writing what an honest man would say, his main role is for the main characters to be baffled by him as their normal methods, bribes or death threats, have no effect – and there is always the small chance that he may succeed in exposing their crimes.
Well Senator Johnson had United States Senate hearings into many things – exposing that TINET (There Is No Early Treatment) is a LIE. The media responded – by attacking him, not attacking the people, such as Dr Fauci, who had allowed hundreds of thousands of Americans to die. Hundreds of thousands of people were allowed to die in order to serve the Progressive cause – and that makes it fine (as far as the establishment are concerned – because they are Progressives).
Later Senator Johnson exposed the fact that there were Antifa (strictly speaking an Antifa off shoot organisation) involved in the events of January 6th – there is even film of them, and a few of them were actually arrested (that was not in their plan at all – they wanted to direct their opponents to destruction). But have no fear the Director of the FBI, a lump of excrement which has somehow grown legs and is able to walk about, is here – ready to lie constantly (on oath) about just about everything.
The media again responded – by attacking the Senator (not the bad guys – because the media are also bad guys, as are the FBI and the rest of the bureaucracy – including the health bureaucracy).
But he is not really concerned – as long as he dies justified, and can go before God having done his duty, he really does not seem to care what they do to him.
Marcus Aurelius had the same attitude – WITHOUT religious faith.
“From my brother Severus, to love my kin, and to love truth, and to love justice; and through him I learned to know Thrasen, Helvidius, Cato, Dion, Brutus; and from him I received the idea of a polity in which there is the same law for all, a polity administered with regard to equal rights and equal freedom of speech, and the idea of a kingly government which respects most of all the freedom of the governed”.
Totally insane for a Roman Emperor to write those words (and he meant it all) – but a wonderful madness, worth dying (and even living – and living is a lot harder) for. Marcus Aurelius – who wanted peace and spent his years at war (the Parthians and then the Germanic invasions that went as far as Italy before being forced back step by bloody step back into the dark forests of Central Europe), whilst his internal organs were eaten away by his sickness.
Marcus Aurelius also faced plague – plague that was vastly worse than Covid 19, the idea of covering up or smearing medical treatments would have not have found favour with him. He killed many people in war – but none for the reason of an “agenda”.
“we must destroy the freedom of the governed, Freedom of Speech and those other primitive things, in order to build our perfect society” – that would have sounded evil to Marcus Aurelius.
Because it is evil.
One thing about the covid-19 risk calculator:
It measures the risk of CATCHING the virus and dying from it, or being hospitalized from it.
That strikes me as silly: the risk of CATCHING the virus depends on many factors, none of which is included in the questionnaire.
Furthermore, the risk of catching the virus depends on how widespread the virus is. In the first wave, that changed drastically every week in the rising phase, more slowly but noticeably in the waning phase.
Averaging the risk over the first wave (which is what the risk calculator seems to do) is just inane.
—The good news is that, if you do catch the virus, you are much less likely to die now than in the first wave. Something which is ignored in the risk calculator.
My main problem with the risk calculator is that it does not calculate the risk of getting a severe case of Long Covid. Long Covid often happens in those whose initial infection was not severe enough to be hospitalized.
I am personally more worried about getting Long Covid. I think being debilitated long term with something that has no treatment or recognition is harder than dropping dead.
I say this as someone who chose not to get vaccinated and who agrees with much of the libertarian views of this blog. I can not share or use the calculator as evidence.
I do like the idea of speakeasy gatherings tho….
Perry,
I beat you to it. My absolute risk of dying from coronavirus is 1 in 5000, or 1 in 6211 with no risk factors. What the public needs to be made aware of is that, to significantly increase the risk of dying of covid, one has to be suffering from a serious health condition, such as cancer, or have undergone a major medical procedure, such as an organ transplant.
Meanwhile, according to this website (https://www.finder.com/life-insurance/odds-of-dying) my chances of dying from all causes in the next year are about 1.15%, or 1 in 87.
In the wider context, isn’t the problem that people have learned to trust the government? And why shouldn’t they? How many people receive a cash payment, a job, a house, a car or some other in-kind benefit from it? Children are mostly taught in government-funded schools, and let’s not forget Our Beloved NHS (TM). Isn’t the government like the kindly uncle, with lollipops for everyone. (But only low-calorie, sugar-free lollipops, of course.) So when the government tells people it is going to take away most of their liberties, and effectively place them under house arrest, people trust it to have nothing but their best interests at heart.
No, not in the slightest bit silly. It is an algorithm with a very specific purpose, to inform you what your risk is likely to be IF YOU CATCH IT. You can then make your own decision if that behoves you to adjust your risk OF catching it. These are two separate things.
I believe that the late Emperor of Ethiopia found lamp-posts handy, as did the folk of La Paz at one stage. Good on the former; I know too little about Bolivian politics.
At this stage, I am going to have to see really good evidence that “long covid” is a significant risk, given the endless litany of claims that have collapsed under closer scrutiny.
Asymptomatic transition: debunked. Surface transmission: largely debunked. The need for masks in non-clinical setting: debunked. Any need whatsoever for masks outside: utterly debunked & so preposterous it boggles the mind & yet is law in many places. Covid antibodies only lasting a few months: debunked. Variants resistant to antibodies: largely debunked.
I am not saying your concern is unreasonable, but I am sure you can see why I am a bit dubious 😉
Then do it! London is jumping with covid speakeasies
Ah! That is a clearer definition of what it’s indicating than the site itself, which left me puzzled. It says:
“The table shows the absolute risk of catching and dying COVID-19 over a 90-day period based on data from the first peak of the pandemic.”
Perry:
No, that is definitely NOT what it informs.
The numbers are just wrong.
They cannot possibly be right by your interpretation.
And besides, the site informs you of this, as bobby b quotes:
(Although bobby seems to be confused by the ‘catching’ bit.)
Snorri Godhi (April 3, 2021 at 6:51 pm), the calculator is a statistical summary. It communicates to people real statistics about the numbers who have been hospitalised and the numbers who have died, and it communicates them in the palatable form of a personal risk assessment. You could add a hundred more factors – but why bother? It serves a useful purpose – and from Perry’s PoV (and mine), making it slower to complete would make it less useful.
Annual risk of dying from a road accident in the UK is about 1 in 20,000. It’s more likely if you own a car, a lot more likely if you drive every day, etc. If you confine yourself to a lifetime of just walking down roads and sometime crossing them, it is less likely.
More exactly, what confuses me is the difference between PdH’s explanation and the inclusion of the word “catching” on the website.
Paul Marks, Uruguay was doing OK until October with less than 5 new cases per million people per day (though not as well as Taiwan, Vietnam, Thailand, China (if you can believe them), Australia, New Zealand, all with less than 1) but it’s looking like a disaster right now with 800 vs 70 in UK, 200 in USA.
Hahahahaha. The machine protects itself – if you were the UK’s national leader and tried to actually upset the status quo it would lead to only one occupied lamppost.
Precisely.
Not hard to understand really. It means getting-infected-and-dying-as-a-result… not chance to get infected. If you stay entirely isolated, you have a zero change of getting infected regardless of having every single cofactor ticked & you really don’t need an algorithm to come up with that number.
Really? Now explain Brexit.
Brexit didn’t affect the local power structure. The same people are making decisions. They’re not happy about Brexit because they can’t blame someone in Brussels for unpopular policies they’d like to implement, but it’s not actually a threat.
Also, I think they expected to reverse it, de jure or de facto. Maybe they still do.
Mathematics flies above the heads of most people – it should not, as it is not that hard if people bother to think about it, but it does.
The international authorities know that be know that Lockdowns are incredibly harmful, and they also know that they do not reduce the Covid death rate.
Therefore, they are following these policies for other reasons – which they have been nice enough to explain to us in conferences (with videos – World Health Organisation, United Nations, World Economic Forum and so on) and now in signed editorials in newspapers. Creating a new society with “Stakeholder Capitalism” (Corporate State) in the name of “Sustainable Development” for “The Planet” – if it was not Covid 19 (regardless of its origins) it would be some other justification.
Meanwhile the American Corporations just carry on – their latest crusade is for (yes for) Election Rigging.
The Corporations are even denouncing the very mild Bill that has been passed in Georgia to limit Election Rigging (at least to some extent), by asking for voter I.D.
The Corporations (Coca Cola, Delta Airlines – and on and on) are saying that it is RACIST to oppose Election Rigging – not just in 2020, but in all-future-elections. All future elections must be rigged – that is the Corporate policy position.
Not exactly a surprise that they also support the official “narrative” in relation to Covid 19 – they are not very good people.
I see no reason to believe that British Corporate culture will not follow a similar path.
Bruce Hoult I do not know what the present Uruguay death figures are – you may well be right Sir.
“Brexit” independence – that is an interesting one.
More than one Member of Parliament has told me that Mr Johnson did not want to win the referendum, I do not know whether that is true or not. But certainly there has been no move to deregulation or the reduction in government spending.
Covid 19 does not explain this – as regulations and government spending were increasing BEFORE it.
The logical conclusion is that those of us, including myself, who hoped that Mr Johnson would follow a policy of a smaller government were WRONG.
I think that Erik’s point is that there is little point in independence if one keeps following the policies of the international establishment.
However, independence does give us the possibility of following different policies – if we had different leadership. Or if the present leadership could be convinced to take a smaller government line.
“And how do we achieve that”.
I do not know – but just because I do not know, does not mean there is no solution. Someone else may think of a solution.
OK, to be clear:
This is the chance I have, as an uninfected person, to both catch the virus and then die of it.
Not, “to inform you what your risk is likely to be IF YOU CATCH IT.”
Right?
Reverse what policy, specifically?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/they-voted-brexit-now-many-u-k-fishermen-feel-betrayed-n1255986
Having read the FAQs and then the BMJ paper, I think Perry MAY be wrong in that the risk given is the risk of first catching and then dying from CoViD, rather than risk of dying conditional on having caught it. The wording is quite unclear.
The risk is based on stats for the first wave in the UK (so currently a large overestimate of both the risk of catching it and then of the conditional risk of dying).
More precisely, the paper authors studied about 8m UK residents (based on 1200 odd general practices). They split them 3 to 1, then derived estimates from the experience of 3/4 of them over the period 24 Jan 2020- 30 April 2020, and validated those estimates on the last 1/4. They further validated the estimates on another temporal cohort from the period 1 May to 30 June 2020.
They used PCR test data to confirm infection. Then (essentially) they said there were x people with such and such risk factors on the books, percent p caught it, percent q (of x) were hospitalised and percent d (of x) died of it during the period, so your risk of hospitalisation is q and of death is d.
A quote from the discussion section of the paper:
Bruce Hoult – I remembered to check this morning, I apologise for forgetting to check last night.
The Uruguay death rate from Covid 19 is just over 31 per hundred thousand people, the United Kingdom death rate is just over 191 per hundred thousand people.
I think we can both agree that 31 is a smaller number than 191 – HOWEVER that does not mean that deaths may not go up in future in Uruguay, EARLY TREATMENT is the key to this, not lockdowns (as in the United Kingdom) or border controls – as in Uruguay.
I have to be honest about this, even though the following words are humiliating for me – regimes such as Belarus and Nicaragua behaved far more rationally in relation to Covid 19 in 2020 than such nations as the United Kingdom and the United States did. The Western response seemed to be designed to inflict as much HARM as possible (economic harm, social harm, and medical harm), hence the infamous Dr Fauci quote that the places with the highest Covid Death Rate on the planet, New York and New Jersey, had “done everything right” – from his (utterly despicable) point of view, they had.
Dr Fauci and Peter Daszak are treated as heroes by the Corporate Media.
Bruce Hoult: the infection rates does not matter, only *who* gets it. If people who are at risk are protected, then a higher infection rate amongst people with a trivial risk is actually a good thing, bringing herd immunity faster.
No, I don’t think so. It is the risk if you catch it. The question of “will you catch it?” is dependent on two things: exposure & immunity. If you are immune or isolated, your chance of catching it is essentially nil. The algorithm does not ask if you have T-cell immunity* or if you are completely self-isolated, or live on the Isle of Skye in a remote croft (however, it does ask for a post code to analyse ‘deprivation’ as that has a statistically quantifiable impact on overall health cofactors). So, unless I have utterly misunderstood, it is only concerning itself with risk analysis *if* you get infected. On an actuarial basis, it would not make much difference to me if the risk included catching it/not catching, but I do concede that would make the risk once infected rather higher.
* = as there are only expensive research-orientated tests for T-cell immunity currently available, hardly anyone would know the answer, unless they were repeatedly exposed & didn’t get infected.
The teaching of “Social Responsibility” in Business Schools (which started to bubble up as long ago as the 1970s) has been a disaster – it has helped lead to the present terrible situation where the Corporations support the sexual mutilation of children, and the perpetual rigging of elections (not “just” the 2020 American Presidential Election – but all FUTURE elections, as honest elections are “racist” – just as biology is a “social construct” and-so-on).
Given the utter mess that Corporate Culture (partly due to education) has become – it is not a surprise that the Corporations also support allowing vast numbers of people to die of Covid 19 when Early Treatment exists that could have saved most of them. Remember, according to the Frankfurt School of Marxism (the source of Corporate attitudes on race, “gender”, sexuality, and everything else), biology and medicine are just “Social Constructs” which must be judged entirely on the basis of whether or not a specific policy aids or holds back the Progressive cause.
“But most Corporate Executives have no idea that what they are taught in university, and so on, is Frankfurt School Marxism” – quite true and I think this is the core-of-the-problem.
If the word “Marxism”, rather than “social responsibility” or “being Woke” or “Social Justice”. was used then Corporate Executives might wake up.
It might just occur to them that pushing Marxism was not in the interests of their business enterprise or their own personal interests – not the same thing, as Corporate Executives do not own the means of production.
However, the “ESG” Agenda from the American government, and the Federal Reserve dependent Credit Bubble banks, seeks to shirt circuit the possibility that Corporate Executives might wake up and realise that they are digging their own graves.
Under the ESG (environment, social justice and governance) agenda, Corporations that do not have a “high score” (for example push the “Trans” cult for children in their advertisements) will find it very hard to get credit – and will be hit in various other ways.
Remember the radical left have had many years, indeed many decades, to influence the institutions of government and society – so when a President (Donald John Trump) has elected who was not even “Progressive Lite” (as the Bush family have always been), he found himself quite isolated in the very government he was supposed to be in charge of.
For example, when a dreadful disease (Covid 19) came along – the first instinct of President Trump was to turn to the health officials to see what they said about treating this disease.
I do not think that Donald John Trump understands, not even now, that these officials had other priorities and were not really people interested in healing individual patients.
The officials were, and are, dedicated to a political agenda – that is what the words “Public Health” mean to them. Building a Collectivist Society – by any means necessary, for the “Greater Good”.
It was a total culture clash – and I suspect President Trump still does not fully understand this, although he may.
I suspect that Dr Atlas (who was brought in too late) does understand it – at least partly.
People who know me and my background may be baffled at my words concerning Belarus and Nicaragua.
Yes I have opposed the regime in Belarus since 1994 (and the Soviet regime before that) and yes I have been against Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua since 1979.
But the facts are the facts (objective truth exists – contrary to the view of American Pragmatist philosophers) and one must follow the facts to get to the truth of these matters.
It is now very clear that the dictators of Belarus and Nicaragua did far less harm to their countries, in relation to Covid 19, that most (most – not all) Western governments did to their countries.
I do not like that (I hate it) – but it is the truth.
PdH – it’ no use belittling the size or significance of the pandemic with a fancy chance calculator.
Number of deaths – compared to seasonal flu – is X 10. For each death there were probably 3 or 4 grave cases which recovered but sustained permanent lung damage and maybe other side effects. And others sustained minor damage…
People in their 50ies or 60ies died too. And people in their 70ies or 80ies would like to live on too.
Isolating the vulnerable… easier said than done…
This pandemic is worst by far than anything in the last century.
You can argue about this or that item in the government’s response.
You can’t deny the seriousness of the pandemic or blame all it’s damages on government.
That is to say, more than one member of parliament has told you that Boris Johnson did not want to become prime minister but instead to have his career crash, and to go down in political history as a would-be-populist political failure.
Scepticism is wise. As I’ve commented before (following Hannah Arendt), cynicism and gullibility are not opposites – nor wise.
Fifth-rate people can be rewarded for duplicity beyond anything they could reasonably hope to win for themselves. (For example, whether longstanding Democrat Lin Wood’s many unsolicited and inept election fraud cases were sincere, or part of the planned post-election cover-up, exploiting that he had once done legal work for Trump, is something I have not researched in detail. I merely recognise the latter is not an immediately absurd idea.) But front-rank leaders have more to gain by winning.
Moreover: by making the chance-calculator the overriding argument – you imply that had the chace (or danger) been greater – the government intervention (lockdowns) might have been justified. I don’t like this line of argument – which is unprincipled.
I like more the unique Swedish response: “we do not have a Constitutional right to impose such limitations on people”. The preventive measures were recommended and voluntary, without enforcement. (Though some restrictions were enforced too).
Jacob, this seasonal flu? If seasonal flu can magically transform into COVID, why can’t respiratory infections and cardio-vascular disease?
Deaths with COVID =/= deaths from COVID.
Niall – one of the Members of Parliament who told me that (that Mr Johnson did not want the campaign to succeed) has spent his life campaigning for British independence. That does not mean he is correct – he could be mistaken. But he was not lying to me – he was giving me his honest opinion.
Jacob – excellent point about Sweden and the principled position Sir.
The Swedish government wanted to lockdown – in spite of the chief medical officer in Sweden saying that such a policy would be harmful (not beneficial), but quietly were given legal advice that under the Constitution of Sweden they could not.
If Antoine Clarke was still about here he would make the point that he always said that even a Progressive Constitution may have elements within in it that can be used against a government.
What the establishment wanted (not necessarily Mr Johnson – but certainly the establishment generally) was for the vote on British independence to be held and LOST in 2016, and for Donald Trump to be the Republican candidate for President (hence their pushing of him in the Primaries) and then LOSE to Hillary Clinton.
They they could say “the people of the United Kingdom and the United States have been given a free choice – and they have chosen to back our agenda”.
However, the votes occurred – but they LOST. At least the American establishment then came to the conclusion that elections should, in future, be RIGGED. For the Greater Good – for the Progressive cause. The Social Media companies stated almost at once – for example there was as Google conference (which was filmed) where high executives of one of the largest Corporations on the planet openly said that this (defeat of the Progressive cause in an election) must never be allowed to happen again. Hence the internet censorship campaign (which various corporations cooperated in using various methods to reduce the reach of people they disagreed with politically) and the mainstream media propaganda campaign of vicious lies – which started at once, and is continuing to this day.
The media were always biased – but, as Tim Pool has noted, they used to twist the truth rather than blatantly lie. Now they WOULD blatantly lie – every day. But they feared that would be not be enough – so Election Rigging was agreed.
Mr Zuckerberg (Facebook) spent almost half BILLION Dollars gaining control of the voting process in certain key areas (as Stalin is supposed to have said “how many people vote for you does not matter – what matters is who counts the votes”) several other figures did similar things – at both Corporate and personal expense. Time Magazine called them, with admiration, the “Cabal” (their word – not mine).
A lot more talk about Covid 19 “passports” on Classic F.M. today (my television has gone wrong – so I am listening to the radio).
It appears that they will not just be about foreign travel – but will be about entering virtually anywhere INSIDE the country. So not really “passports” – more “passes”. They are to be biometric and so on – just as David Cullen pointed out last year (he also “predicted” that they would not just be about foreign travel) – Mr Cullen was able to “predict” these things because he had examined the work of various international Corporate and government bodies who were working on this matter BEFORE Covid 19.
If it is a response to Covid 19 – why were international bodies working on these ideas before Covid 19 existed?
There is some positive news – for example I heard some days ago that the Governor of Florida (the third largest population American State) has forbidden Covid 19 passes (so called “passports”).
The Corporate Media (as one would be expect) responded to his action against the totalitarian agenda by launching a smear campaign against the Governor of Florida – specifically CBS (Viacom – the organisation who make STD – Star Trek Discovery, which has the same political motivation) made up a fake “pay to play” story and pushed it against Governor DeSantis.
As a former military intelligence officer the Governor responded that he knew they would try something like that.
It is fascinating how everything links up.
For example, the lady who has (thanks to her father Mr Redstone) a lot of shared in CBS Viacom has been asking questions about why Star Trek is so awful now – why it does not make them MONEY any more.
Viacom has lost half its stock market value recently – it is not nearly as powerful as Disney (ABC) and Comcast (NBS) – both of which, although technically private companies, are really part of the permanent government.
The lady has been told that the contract of Mr Kurtzman (who controls Star Trek) is ironclad – although he did not invent the show (he was just brought in to make a Centre Left franchise a Far Left franchise).
But the lady is persisting – could not, for example, the new “Star Trek: Strange New Worlds” make them some money – by toning down Frankfurt School of Marxism propaganda just a bit?
Sadly I think it will turn out as the Mandalorian did over at Disney.
There were signs that the Frankfurt School of Marxism stuff were being toned down on this show (at least compared to the products of Kathleen Kennedy) – but then the “Woke” (Frankfurt School of Marxism) elite struck – firing Gina Carano for not being a Frankfurt School Marxist. Even “Joseph Stalin” (fake name – yes I know) was not Frankfurt School (in fact he thought it was insane and destructive) – so he would be too “right wing” for Corporate America these days.
After all – J.S. liked the old Hollywood films (the sort of films that Disney and the others do not want anyway to see) so he must have been a Reactionary-Running-Dog.
The new Disney series “Falcon and the Winter Soldier” got to episode two before the Frankfurt School of Marxism overwhelmed it – evil white police officers out to murder a noble black person.
Future episodes of this and other shows will no doubt show them hunting down “Anti Vaxers” and people who refuse to wear masks.
A lady in New York City has had a seven year old child taken away from her (by a totalitarian “judge”) for the “crime” of dropping her child off to school WITHOUT WEARING A MASK. The lay did not actually enter the school, but that does not matter. The family is evil (after all Plato made this Collectivist point) and any excuse must be used to destroy traditional families and have children brought up communally.
Covid 19 will nicely as an excuse for this “judge” – thank you very much.
Sure I can. This is not even close to matching a great many pandemics in the past, the only difference is the global nature of the over-reaction & the entirely intentional mass hysteria.
It must be stressed that the campaign against the family goes back long before Covid 19.
Basically every government policy pushed in Britain and the United States since at least the 1960s has been about undermining the family, and the other cultural institutions of Civil Society.
If I was to go back to the 1950s and warn people about what was going to happen – they would just shake their heads sadly at my mental illness (“fake Moon landing stuff”).
In the end we are like the man at the end of the first “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” film – shouting warnings at passing motorists, who do not believe a word of what one is saying.
The man who made that film understood what was happening in society – his real target were the totalitarians, but he had to dress it up as science fiction.
As if the international establishment would produce a plague (by ACCIDENT or design) and then use it as an excuse for their long standing totalitarian agenda – get out here you lunatic, you will next be saying next they knew that Early Treatment could have saved most of the people who died.
Perry’s latest comment is clearly correct – we know this, by looking at countries that did NOT lockdown.
Let us say, for the sake of argument, that the Covid death estimates of the opposition (not the government) of such places as Belarus and Nicaragua are correct – even the opposition Covid death estimates for these (and ALL OTHER) non lockdown countries are well BELOW that of the United Kingdom
The international establishment have noted that people are starting to understand that this is not the Spanish Flu of 1918-19 – and they are responding to that.
We are told that “the next virus” will “make Covid 19 look like a caress in comparison”.
It is not hard to find film of international establishment people saying such things and smirking as they do so – i.e. they know all about “the next virus” and they ENJOY thinking about what it is going to do.
How does chanting “fake Moon Landing stuff” explain this?
How can the establishment know this? And why are they smirking?
I am not a fan of the “Greater Good” and I do not want their “wonderful new society” – it is not even that “new”, after all Plato’s “Republic” was written rather a long time ago, as was “The New Atlantis” of Sir Francis Bacon.
Klaus Schwab and co – adding computers and so on, does not really make the difference you claim it does.
You are just pushing the same totalitarian poison in new bottles.
For all those believing that ” Long Covid” is a thing and not just a new scary name for Post Viral Syndrome, there is a 2017 article here on Long Flu.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-17497-6
Thank you Nessimmersion. I am glad that has been cleared up – although the propaganda will, of course, continue.
As for he 1956 “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” film – that was directed by Don Siegal and it does end on a note of hope.
Accidents do derail even some well planned conspiracies.
For example, the Spanish Civil Guard who wanted to go to the toilet – and, by accident, goes into a room that contained the records of Spanish Organised Crime.
Or the small town policemen who stumbled upon the meeting of the vast “Crime Families” of the United States.
Perhaps a truck will have an accident – and the “seed pods” of the “Pod People” will come into view, but I would not advice contacting the FBI about it.
https://apps.who.int/flumart/Default?ReportNo=10
I wasn’t sure if the graph showing virtually no flu deaths in the last 12 months was genuine, after all the link was to a tweet dated 1st April.
So here it is. From the Who.but/flunet site. I set the data parameters from week 1 in 2010 to week 52 in 2020.
Am I missing something here?
So lockdowns have almost completely eliminated the spread of influenza, a respiratory disease spread via airborne mechanisms. But it hasn’t eliminated covid-19, a respiratory disease spread via airborne mechanisms.
Has there been some mystical event that caused a sudden worldwide 50 point drop in average IQs?
Paul:
Surely it is now clear beyond doubt that Boris Johnson is a liar and a bullshitter? He always has been, and he always will be.
He has lied to every woman in his life, including all his wives. He will no doubt do the same to Princess Nut Nuts in due course.
He lied to us that he had got a good Brexit deal (the only reason he was elected as PM) when he had not.
He lied about being a freedom loving person. Clearly he is not. He enjoys the freedom to shag any woman he meets and to get away with it, beyond that, he stands for nothing. He does not have a scruple or a principle in his body. We need rid of him as soon as possible.
His new found devotion to Big Green is no doubt as fake as every other cause he professes to believe, nonetheless it will literally destroy the economy of this country, and reduce us all to penury. For this, if for no other reason, he must be stopped before he can do any more damage. My one proviso is that under no circumstances must Michael Gove be allowed to succeed him. There is a limit to how much of this our poor old nation can take.
JohnK,
I don’t disagree. But I wonder how long until people begin blaming the game instead of the player? Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, Christine LaGarde, and Tedros Adhanom thank you for blaming the player and not the game.
What is needed for any country to protect the de facto liberty of its people is a strongman who makes Viktor Orban look like Jimmy Carter. There is, unfortunately, no other way. Sovereignty abhors a vacuum.
People are starting to slowly wake up, though. Example:
https://americanmind.org/salvo/why-the-claremont-institute-is-not-conservative-and-you-shouldnt-be-either/
“This is not even close to matching a great many pandemics in the past”
I very glad it’s not even close….. but it’s bad enough. Some 3 million deaths worldwide. So far… and counting.
Not so bad as the Spanish flu of 1918-1921, not by far, but … bad enough.
There was no other pandemic worse than it in the last 100 years.
As to “great pandemics in the past” — like which? The black death of the 13 century? Other than that I don’t remember that many bad pandemics, though I haven’t looked them up.
Shlomo:
The thing is, we don’t and can’t vote for any of these people, we can only vote for the politicians who make up our government.
It is clear that Boris Johnson takes his orders from the World Economic Forum, and for that reason he must go. When he posed as a freedom loving journalist, he used to mock Big Green. Now he is prime minister, and in a position to do something about it, he has suddenly become Big Green’s biggest proponent. I don’t know why. Maybe he was lying in the past, maybe he’s lying now, it doesn’t matter. All I know is, we need to be rid of him.
Jacob,
They are saying only 3 million died have died? Seems really low to me. Do you know how many people die each year worldwide from all causes?
In the USA if you die from any cause and are positive for COVID when you die then you are classified as a COVID death – did you know this? Do you know how different countries count “COVID deaths”?
But bad enough for what, exactly?
Hong Kong Flu and 1957 influenza both killed higher percentages of the global population in less time.
This is the only true assertion you said in your entire comment.
JohnK,
Did you not read what I wrote? I said that “Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, Christine LaGarde, and Tedros Adhanom thank you for blaming the player and not the game.” The game, in case you didn’t know, is voting.
It is clear that the Prime Minister of the UK always will take his/her orders from the World Economic Forum, World Health Organization, etc.
FTFY
The answer to “why” is democracy. Sovereignty abhors a vacuum.
If you want to protect your liberty and your way of life, then you need a sovereign who will protect you. A strongman who makes Viktor Orban look like Jimmy Carter. The “Prime Minister of the United Kingdom” could be anyone. It doesn’t fucking matter.
They are puppets – usually they are puppets before entering government, but they are ALWAYS puppets after entering government. The words they say are just theater, their pledges, their promises are all theater. It doesn’t matter who the “Prime Minister of the United Kingdom” is. And it will NEVER matter – so long as the person doesn’t have the de facto power to do what needs to be done. A strongman who makes Vladimir Putin look like Emmanuel Macron.
Shlomo.
Latest figures show a world population of 7.8 billion with average life expectancy of 73.
In the context of c100 million annual deaths there is nothing surprising about 3% being infected by a worldwide virus. However only a small proportion of that already small proportion of deaths will have been specifically due to Covid.
I spoke to few friends on the ‘phone over the weekend. They all seemed convinced that they could drop dead from coronavirus at any moment.
Sometimes I wish it was true 🤬
Sometimes I wish it was true 😡
Shlomo:
I agree with you that we need a PM who does not take his orders from Klaus Schwab et al. Easier said than done, of course. I thought we had a chance with Boris Johnson, who had posed as being a freedom loving enemy of Big Green, and yet has proved to be the exact opposite.
I don’t know what to do about it though. Under our voting system, the government will either be Conservative or Labour. Both are as bad as each other. I don’t see any solution.
John K. I agree with the stance taken by the Member of Parliament for Kettering (where I live) and many other Members of Parliament – I am against the Emergency Powers the government has taken under the Enabling Act of 2020.
Was I personally wrong in my assessment of Mr Johnson in the leadership campaign for the Conservative Party? YES I WAS WRONG. The only thing I can say in my defence is that I did NOT support Mr Johnson in the First Round of voting (not that ordinary members had a vote in the First Round) – indeed he was well down my mental list of preferred candidates in the First Round. In the Second Round of voting I supported, and voted for, Mr Johnson – because he had campaigned for British independence, and because he was said to be generally well disposed to liberty at least in a vague way (John K. – that was my view at-that-time, not now).
I can not even claim I was not warned – as I was warned, including by several Members of Parliament who had met Mr Johnson many times (I have never met him) and who told me that he was not even a real supporter of British independence from the European Union. The editorial in the Daily Telegraph of March 31st 2021 (not April the 1st as I had hoped) that so shocked and horrified me, came as no shock to these men at all. They were expecting it – world governance under an unelected body. This appears to be what all this was about – from the start. Regardless of whether the release of the virus (the gain-of-function virus) from the Wuhan research establishment was an ACCIDENT (and it may well have been an ACCIDENT) or deliberate – the “international community” was waiting for such an event, and took advantage of it.
The behaviour of HMG in relation to the international establishment comes as no shock to these men at all – HMG has behaved in the pro international establishment way that they EXPECTED it to behave. I was shocked – they were not shocked.
Niall suggests I was gullible – and I was indeed gullible, but not in the way he suggests (see above).
Paul:
Faced with a choice between Boris Johnson and a boring man who wanted to stay in the EU, it had to be Johnson.
I liked the image Johnson portrayed, of a freedom loving man who was optimistic about Britain’s future outside the EU.
However, after his massive election victory, fought to “Get Brexit Done”, it all went wrong. His version of “Brexit” was little better than Theresa May’s, and like hers has left Northern Ireland in the Single Market, and thus drawn a trade border down the Irish Sea. He has become a huge proponent of Big Green, and has imposed the biggest erosion of freedom ever.
Now that vaccination has been such a success, he seems afraid of declaring victory. Instead he whitters on about vaccine passports. He has lost his nerve entirely.
The article you cite about a world health government is a case in point. Does he believe it? Does he believe anything? There is no indication that he does. He seems to be under the Green influence of Princess Nut Nuts at the moment, but he will leave her in due course. By then it will be too late. The Conservative Party should get rid of him, but it won’t. And since Big Green is now the orthodoxy, it scarcely matters. We are doomed, as the famous Scotsman said.
Perry, Bobby:
Apologies for the late reply.
I wrote that “the numbers don’t add up.”
At the time i had in mind the worst-affected areas, such as Bergamo (death rate 0.6% in the 1st wave iirc) or NY/NJ (death rate about 0.17% in the 1st wave).
The covid risk calculator gives a figure of about 0.02% of dying from the virus.
Now, if that were the risk of dying if you catch the virus, it would be at least as high as the Bergamo risk; certainly higher than the NY/NJ risk, since not everybody in NY or NJ caught the virus in the 1st wave. (Otherwise there would not be a 2nd wave.)
Therefore, the output of the risk calculator must be the risk of CATCHING the virus AND DYING subsequently.
NOT the risk of dying conditional on catching the virus.
(to be continued…)
…But, you might say, Bergamo and greater NY City are basically retirement homes for the most weak and ill Italians and Americans.
I don’t actually think that you would make such a silly argument; but in any case, let’s look at the UK, which provides the statistical basis for the risk calculator.
In the 1st wave, the death rate in the whole of the UK was about 0.06%.
That is 3 times higher than the death risk of 0.02% given by the risk calculator.
So the risk calculator is not even an accurate measure of the risk of catching the virus & dying from it in the 1st wave: it is a drastic under-estimate of that risk.
(Things can only get worse when you add the risk in the 2nd wave.)
As far as i can see, the ‘risk’ calculator is actually a bullshit calculator. It calculates bullshit.
But that might be because the web page does not specify correctly what the calculator actually calculates.
The bullshit is that the covid-19 deaths are anywhere near what the gross figure suggests, because where have all the flu deaths gone? You know, that other respiratory disease that happens all the time.
Who can do this? A patriotic strongman who makes Viktor Orban look like an innocent school girl.
This is what Klaus Schwab fears. And it’s probably the only thing he fears.
Trump is a model for the future, but if we do succeed then Trump will in retrospect look tame, polite, and gentle.
Rule of law is not protecting our freedoms. A person can.
Politico
That would be two years counted as one, so yes, it would look worse.
First wave was seasonal outbreak for 2019/20, with a side serving of hysterical terrorism, provided by the BBC (in the UK, elsewhere – deep State MSM, CNN MSNBC, etc), ‘second wave’ was seasonal for 2020/21. There was no ‘second wave of COVID, from 2019/20.
More people died during the 2003/04 seasonal epidemic than last year, yet we didn’t have the hysteria and insanity that we got last year. And nobody remembers that a lot of people died in the winter of 2003, today.
JohnK
You make a lot of interesting points.
As for Private Fraser (the undertaker – if I remember correctly).
Yes “We are all Doomed! said without any panic at all – but with a grim understanding of reality.
Before Perry jumps in – yes it is true that Private Fraser was wrong in each episode, none of the platoon was killed. They were not doomed at all.
Source? I’ve looked, but had no luck finding this data.
These data (England and Wales only) show that the death rate was as high in 2003 as in 2020.
The death rate had been roughly at 2003 levels for at least 12 years, it then dropped significantly for several years, and remained low from 2009-2019. So 2003-04 doesn’t seem to have been that bad, compared with previous years.
In 2020 it went back up to 2003 levels.
The difference between flu and covid is the asymptomatic transmission. If the average person (trying to obey the lockdown rules) gets flu-like symptoms, they isolate, get a covid test and wait for the result. If it’s flu, you’re isolating when you’re infectious. With covid, you could have been infectious for several days without knowing.
This year, there’s been a far greater use of the flu vaccine. I heard it was about 1.5 times as many people have had it this year as last year. It makes sense, covid and flu together would be hard to fight off. So that brings the number of flu cases down.
There’s a lot of flu transmission between kids at school who then go home and give it to their parents, but with the schools shut or with limited contact between classes there’s less in-school transmission of flu so that route’s shut down/reduced as well.
It makes sense, if your kids wake up with the lurgi, you fill them with calpol and send them to school so you don’t have to take the day off work to look after them. If you’ve got flu, you go into work, cough on your boss and get sent home sick!
Put all of these together and you’ve got a massive drop in the flu rates.
Bullshit. The charitable interpretation is you’re confusing pre-symptomatic with asymptomatic. There is almost no evidence that actual asymptomatic transition is a significant risk. And how credulous do you need to be to not think flu deaths are being counted as more fashionable covid deaths when people dying of heart attacks and cancer are being counted as covid deaths?
But this still avoids the real issue: for most people getting covid is no biggie. Unless you’re vulnerable or closely interact with a vulnerable person, its not worth worrying about.
Published/posted in the archives, probably more than once.
So, if it wasn’t worth getting hysterical in 2003, there was nothing to get hysterical about in 2019/20, agreed?
I don’t think you have to be particularly ‘credulous’ just part of a thrust to panic the population, for a variety of motives. Hardly any of which are actually to do with the health and wellbeing of individual members of the public.
In other words it is deliberate deceitful misdirection in order to spread panic.
But here is my favorite.
BBC Headline: – Died with Coronavirus.
Article: – He was in hospital for heart failure. In hospital at 78 with his second heart about to check out. He was dying and it’s unlikely he’d have been given a third heart at that age. But the BBC had to make the connection with COVID-19
Corker: – Contracted COVID-19 IN HOSPITAL!!
The scenario I described would cover pre-symptomatic people.
It does not change the fact that most people with flu will quarantine while testing for covid, so are not in the community while infectious.
The Lancet
…our study highlights that asymptomatic individuals represent a significant risk for transmission.
Our data show that asymptomatic carriers infect on average the same number of people as symptomatic individuals.
JAMA
59% of all transmission came from asymptomatic transmission, comprising 35% from presymptomatic individuals and 24% from individuals who never develop symptoms.
So it’s fairly clear that pre-and asymptomatic spread is a significant problem.
I don’t agree. If you take a look at the death rate data, it’s high until 2003. You can even dig into the data here (excel), and see that the death rate begins to curve down in 1980, flattens out in 2010, is between flat and slightly increasing until 2019, then jumps back to 2003 levels.
A sudden increase like that is definitely something to be concerned about.
How does this work?
If you’re a doctor in a cancer ward, does some suit from the hospital admin wander into the ward and say “Dr. Smith, write up the next 3 deaths as covid.”?
Or is it done by email?
Or do a bunch of doctors get together and say “I know what’ll be fun, let’s certify the next few cancer/cardiac/car crash/gunshot deaths as covid. Then we can stay in lockdown, not be allowed to go on holiday, go to the pub or see our mates?”
Which of these scenarios is likely?
Pretty much.
Right back at the beginning of the scamdemic, you might remember the hysteria about ‘ventilators’? Don’t hear too much about those these days, but in March or April (’20) the BBC was ‘losing its wig’ about ventilators, Dyson, was proposing his company could build ventilators if the government wanted, Rolls Royce, one of its main activities building and maintaining aviation engines just lost one of its main revenue streams overnight, was casting around for something to make up its income, also offered to build ventilators for the NHS. I guess, in the Midlands somewhere, there is a warehouse full of brand spanking new ventilators sitting idle. The command economy for you.
It also emerged that ‘ventilated patients’ yielded more cash for some hospitals in the United States than a ‘conventionally’, non ventilated patient.
Then the Youtube clip of a nurse who worked in one of the New York hospitals with among the highest mortality rate at the peak of the scamdemic, she* alleged that patients presenting with an anxiety attack ( after being terrorized by the MSM ) reporting difficulty breathing – were automatically placed on a ventilator.
Financial incentives do have an impact.
* Since been suppressed by YouTube.
Yes, when the daily rate of hospitalisations was increasing fast and the ICUs were filling up, there was a real concern that there would be more patients needing ventilators than there were spaces available.
Given that if someone needs a ventilator and they don’t get it, they’re going to die, several firms made lots of ventilators to increase capacity. That’s a rational response to the situation. Yes, more were made than were needed, but they haven’t vanished – they’ll get used as the existing stock wears out.
Of course a ventilated patient yields more cash – they also cost the hospital more.
Does this work in the UK as well as the US?
Alleged. I can allege that the vaccine will turn me into a superhero. It won’t, but I can allege it.
Source? Have you asked any doctors about this? I do not find this at all credible.
There have been countless articles in the media about people dying of all kinds of causes but somehow “covid-19” ends up on the death certificate. If you say you’re unaware of that, I don’t believe you.
I’ve heard of it, but nothing credible.
A death certificate can list multiple causes. If you have cancer and are recovering, but your immune system is wrecked from the chemotherapy and you catch covid and die, that’s a covid death. The straw that broke the camel’s back.
If you die of covid, the certificate will state (eg) heart failure, respiratory distress and pneumonia, all caused by covid.
The BMJ
The personal and professional consequences of fabricating or distorting certificates would be serious, and there is no mass conspiracy or incentive, financial or otherwise, to do so. Nor is it credible that such a plot would not have been leaked by now via disgruntled whistleblowers.
There’s absolutely no consequence whatsoever. For most of last year “covid deaths” were not recorded on the basis of a test, just a clinical guestimate of “yeah, that’s covid.” Just revist the gazillion articles written last year if you really care (which you don’t, you’re too invested in The Narrative for some psychological reason). Personally I’d be delighted to feel I could trust authority figures during a pandemic, so my sceptical views aren’t because they give me a warm fuzzy glow.
People have written countless articles highlighting this. Clerks, nurses, even some doctors probably close to retirement anyway I’m guessing 🤣
A REALLY large number of people have now staked their political and/or personal and professional reputations & credibility on this being A Really Bad Thing, one that requires Obedience & Sacrifice & wear that fuckin’ mask in a non clinical setting, mate! No overarching conspiracy is required to understand the collective insanity & wilful stupidity on display.
[…] – Bell Curve […]