Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Conspiracy Theories & Claims

Ermintruder

Delineated by a professional cryptozoologist
Joined
Jul 13, 2013
Messages
5,967
Reaction score
9,209
Points
289
There are some decidedly-odd dynamics emerging from all of this.

I do detect (strongly) that if I, or anyone else I hear making a similar comment (I mean in terms of questioning whether COVID-19 is actually the only or primary factor in a cause of death) there's often an immediate collaborative rush from others to say "shut up, of course it's Covid, you're just in denial, and trying to make it less than it is!!".

A perfect case-in-point for me was at the end of April. I read on Fadebook about someone who (although I did not know personally) has died "of the virus at the age of 44".

I have a number of shared friends and accquaintances who were expressing their individual griefs and sorrows about the passing of this person, and as I was reading down the generic sympathies and condolences, one unusually-detailed comment jumped out at me "it seems so unfair that he's died just now, he really seemed to turn a corner after his heart & lung transplant back in 2018".

I need somebody to pinch me, seriously. Am I actually dreaming this pandemic?

Although every death is a tragedy, it appears to be completely-taboo to mention that (as far as I can tell?) the vast majority of people who are seriously-stricken by the virus, or die, are either suffering a serious (perhaps undiagnosed) pre-existing medical condition or/and are in later old age. But I'm not allowed to say that.

I'm also not allowed to say that the raw baseline deathrate across the world from all causes is around 150,000 deaths per day.

Nor am I meant to say that I've heard some media commentators say (I do hope wrongly) that the overall austerity effects resulting from the economic impacts of the global lockdown could result in financial projections that are of 1800s severity, not just 1920s.

Many of us Forteans, before this all started, might've wished for a new world, in the safe knowledge they weren't going to get one.

We may be witnessing, in many senses, the end of the world we knew: but not for the reasons we might ever have expected, nor in ways we can currently see or understand.
 

Victory

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Jan 15, 2017
Messages
1,351
Reaction score
3,038
Points
159
Location
London

Naughty_Felid

kneesy earsy nosey
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
9,047
Reaction score
12,680
Points
299
It's even more exhausting to question the validity of an agenda driven narrative
- to question if the narrative is as factual as some would have you believe
- Is it all fact based? - Do some of those driving the narrative have other motivations
that are not as benign as they would have us believe?

The narrative here had turned into the right to question
- a few agreed on this right and then some started questioning the nature of
what can be questioned - So I tried to sharpen the questions on this pandemic
this way:

"
So what should be questioned about the current narrative as it plays out over
the Worldwide news media ???

We know that many, many thousands of people are dying, right?

Is it a fair to question to ask whether all of the people who are dying of Covid 19
are actually dying mainly from Covid 19 or are the corollary factors such as
age and secondary medical issues {ie. heart, kidney, or liver disease} the main
cause of death - Remember these other factors make ordinary influenza much
more deadly in those populations.

Is that a fair question? - How many people are directly almost exclusively
dying from Covid 19 ?

Was it a fair question to ask, as has been asked by many, whether the lockdowns,
quarantines, etc. have significantly affected the outcome of the pandemic?

Is it a fair question to ask if the total economic carnage caused by closing down
the World's economic system and essentially causing a worldwide depression
will not in the long run cause more death and misery than had they done it
differently? - Is this not a fair question?

And please don't give me this left wing, right wing BS
- These questions go far beyond any politics.


These questions are questioning the very survival of Civilization !!! "


But no one has the courage to answer???

And you apparently want to disregard it completely and yes,
turn it into a political debate - Sure people on the right and left will do that.

Just admit that you have decided all the agenda driven news is correct;
everything they are doing is correct and no one really has any right to
question it - And if they do question it it is because they have an agenda

That is the Orwellian World of 'Double Speak', or was it 'Double Think" ?

Sometimes called "The New World Order" by conspiracy buffs.


Interestingly, coming on in a few minutes on CBS {US}:

"Pandemic Politics; Amazon; Ghost Guns"
New, 5/10/2020, Season 52 / Episode 33 , Investigative, Interview, News, Topical
Scott Pelly discusses how the scientific community has been hindered by politics to conduct the necessary research to find a COVID-19 vaccine;............."

Apparently using politics is not only disingenuous and counterproductive
- It is jeopardizing lives.

And don't tell me CBS is part of the Murdoch empire - I don't give a dam if it is!

I think it's must be exhausting to be living in a perpetual state of fear that has overtaken a great many people. Not being able to take anything at face value. Not being able to trust anyone.
 

Min Bannister

Possessed dog
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Messages
5,067
Reaction score
7,542
Points
314
I have a number of shared friends and accquaintances who were expressing their individual griefs and sorrows about the passing of this person, and as I was reading down the generic sympathies and condolences, one unusually-detailed comment jumped out at me "it seems so unfair that he's died just now, he really seemed to turn a corner after his heart & lung transplant back in 2018".

I need somebody to pinch me, seriously. Am I actually dreaming this pandemic?

Although every death is a tragedy, it appears to be completely-taboo to mention that (as far as I can tell?) the vast majority of people who are seriously-stricken by the virus, or die, are either suffering a serious (perhaps undiagnosed) pre-existing medical condition or/and are in later old age. But I'm not allowed to say that.
I am not really sure what difference this makes. Is there another reason why, if he was otherwise in good health after his transplant, that he would be dead right now?
 

Xanatic*

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
4,696
Reaction score
5,379
Points
214
People who have organ transplants generally have to take drugs to lower their immune system. To avoid rejection of the organs.
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,196
Reaction score
10,834
Points
299
I think it's must be exhausting to be living in a perpetual state of fear that has overtaken a great many people. Not being able to take anything at face value. Not being able to trust anyone.

So who do you trust in the current circumstances?
So if there wasn't a deadly infectious disease going around, he would still be alive.

But there are always deadly infectious diseases going round, its just that we are used to them. I wonder how many people have died from the 'flu last winter?
 

Ogdred Weary

Born Again Nihilist
Joined
Apr 2, 2012
Messages
5,959
Reaction score
11,416
Points
289
There are some decidedly-odd dynamics emerging from all of this.

I do detect (strongly) that if I, or anyone else I hear making a similar comment (I mean in terms of questioning whether COVID-19 is actually the only or primary factor in a cause of death) there's often an immediate collaborative rush from others to say "shut up, of course it's Covid, you're just in denial, and trying to make it less than it is!!".

A perfect case-in-point for me was at the end of April. I read on Fadebook about someone who (although I did not know personally) has died "of the virus at the age of 44".

I have a number of shared friends and accquaintances who were expressing their individual griefs and sorrows about the passing of this person, and as I was reading down the generic sympathies and condolences, one unusually-detailed comment jumped out at me "it seems so unfair that he's died just now, he really seemed to turn a corner after his heart & lung transplant back in 2018".

I need somebody to pinch me, seriously. Am I actually dreaming this pandemic?

Although every death is a tragedy, it appears to be completely-taboo to mention that (as far as I can tell?) the vast majority of people who are seriously-stricken by the virus, or die, are either suffering a serious (perhaps undiagnosed) pre-existing medical condition or/and are in later old age. But I'm not allowed to say that.

I'm also not allowed to say that the raw baseline deathrate across the world from all causes is around 150,000 deaths per day.

Nor am I meant to say that I've heard some media commentators say (I do hope wrongly) that the overall austerity effects resulting from the economic impacts of the global lockdown could result in financial projections that are of 1800s severity, not just 1920s.

Many of us Forteans, before this all started, might've wished for a new world, in the safe knowledge they weren't going to get one.

We may be witnessing, in many senses, the end of the world we knew: but not for the reasons we might ever have expected, nor in ways we can currently see or understand.

If this virus "sends us back to the 1800s" in terms of most people living in abject or near abject poverty then it shows what a fucking festering empty shithole our "civilisation" really is. Most people have stayed home in most Western countries and only really bought food and medicine, though no doubt many are still buying useless shit from Amazon et al. The lights are still on and there is still food on the shelves, though I'm hearing there are issues beginning to show in the U.S. And yet it's enough to destroy our "economies".

Most jobs are pointless and we can produce food and energy from the labour of a fraction of a percent of the population and we still end up with this. And that's no even taking into account the enormous costs of how we live to the rest of the biosphere, the poor on most of the world or the fact that we are, in terms of resources, borrowing from the future.
 

Naughty_Felid

kneesy earsy nosey
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
9,047
Reaction score
12,680
Points
299
So who do you trust in the current circumstances?


But there are always deadly infectious diseases going round, its just that we are used to them. I wonder how many people have died from the 'flu last winter?
Nowhere near as many that I have died from this think it ranges from a few hundred to about 12 thousand when it's really really bad.

I trust those fighting the pandemic with me.
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,196
Reaction score
10,834
Points
299
Nowhere near as many that I have died from this think it ranges from a few hundred to about 12 thousand when it's really really bad.

I trust those fighting the pandemic with me.

In fact the annual average prior to this year is 17,000 for the UK. The recent peak was 28,330 in 2014/5 .

'fighting the pandemic' - or just doing your job? That probably sounds nastier than I meant it to. What I mean is, that if you work in heath care, dealing with an epidemic is something that most people in such jobs will deal with maybe once in a lifetime, but they do happen at roughly 50 year intervals.

I dislike the 'war on ' rhetoric whether it is drugs or illness. Much nastier things happen in war than people dying of illness.
 

Ringo

I like to not get involved in these matters
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
5,097
Points
239
Location
Stockholm
There are some decidedly-odd dynamics emerging from all of this.

I do detect (strongly) that if I, or anyone else I hear making a similar comment (I mean in terms of questioning whether COVID-19 is actually the only or primary factor in a cause of death) there's often an immediate collaborative rush from others to say "shut up, of course it's Covid, you're just in denial, and trying to make it less than it is!!".

A perfect case-in-point for me was at the end of April. I read on Fadebook about someone who (although I did not know personally) has died "of the virus at the age of 44".

I have a number of shared friends and accquaintances who were expressing their individual griefs and sorrows about the passing of this person, and as I was reading down the generic sympathies and condolences, one unusually-detailed comment jumped out at me "it seems so unfair that he's died just now, he really seemed to turn a corner after his heart & lung transplant back in 2018".

I need somebody to pinch me, seriously. Am I actually dreaming this pandemic?

Although every death is a tragedy, it appears to be completely-taboo to mention that (as far as I can tell?) the vast majority of people who are seriously-stricken by the virus, or die, are either suffering a serious (perhaps undiagnosed) pre-existing medical condition or/and are in later old age. But I'm not allowed to say that.

I'm also not allowed to say that the raw baseline deathrate across the world from all causes is around 150,000 deaths per day.

Nor am I meant to say that I've heard some media commentators say (I do hope wrongly) that the overall austerity effects resulting from the economic impacts of the global lockdown could result in financial projections that are of 1800s severity, not just 1920s.

Many of us Forteans, before this all started, might've wished for a new world, in the safe knowledge they weren't going to get one.

We may be witnessing, in many senses, the end of the world we knew: but not for the reasons we might ever have expected, nor in ways we can currently see or understand.

What you are saying is EXACTLY what has been communicated from the beginning. The old and the vulnerable (sick) will be killed off. There are millions of them. I don't think that the average member of the public knows just how many people are sick or are in risk groups. 15% of the UK population are over 70. That's over 10,000,000 people. That's not including anyone under 70 who has heart disease, diabetes, transplant patients, immune deficiencies etc.

It has ALWAYS been said that the young and the healthy will not die except for a few odd cases (a child under age 9 has died in Sweden). All of this is to protect the older population and the people in risk groups. If they all get sick together then the health services will become overwhelmed. Triage will be needed to sort out the hopeless cases from the fighting chances.

People who get Covid-19 whilst recovering from a transplant operation stand a huge chance of dying. If they hadn't caught it then they may have lived a longer and happier life. So yes, the man you mention died as a result of contracting Covid-19. Otherweise, as @Min Bannister said, he would still be alive.

So who do you trust in the current circumstances?
But there are always deadly infectious diseases going round, its just that we are used to them. I wonder how many people have died from the 'flu last winter?

Cochise - Yes, there have always ben deadly infectious diseases going around but it's not just that we are "used" to them - we have a medical defense aginst them. We build up immunity to them over time. Which means if YOU have had a heart transplant, and the flu comes around, then you and your family have some natural resistance built up. You may not get it as others in the community are also keeping it at bay. Immunisations may not be for that exact strain of flu but you have some antibodies that can give you a head start.

With this deadly infectious disease, we are the the beginning. No-one around you is immune or has had a jab. No one can act as a fire break, stopping it before it hits you with your new heart. You are then dead. Give it 2 or 3 years and we will have natural fire breaks in the population but as this is so new, we are fully exposed to it. The old, the frail and the sick will die. And there are millions of them in the UK alone who we have to protect until we can build up enough of an immunity to limit their exposure.
 

AlienView

"Stargate Explorer"
Joined
Aug 11, 2017
Messages
291
Reaction score
218
Points
44
Location
Cyberspace
I think it's must be exhausting to be living in a perpetual state of fear that has overtaken a great many people. Not being able to take anything at face value. Not being able to trust anyone.
Just consider this:

"
“The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory, is that conspiracy theorists believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is actually chaotic. The truth is that it is not The Iluminati, or The Jewish Banking Conspiracy, or the Gray Alien Theory.

The truth is far more frightening - Nobody is in control.

The world is rudderless.”
― Alan Moore "

And from our founder Charles Fort:

"Almost all people are hypnotics. The proper authority saw to it that the
proper belief should be induced, and the people believed properly."
- Charles Fort

 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,196
Reaction score
10,834
Points
299
What you are saying is EXACTLY what has been communicated from the beginning. The old and the vulnerable (sick) will be killed off. There are millions of them. I don't think that the average member of the public knows just how many people are sick or are in risk groups. 15% of the UK population are over 70. That's over 10,000,000 people. That's not including anyone under 70 who has heart disease, diabetes, transplant patients, immune deficiencies etc.

It has ALWAYS been said that the young and the healthy will not die except for a few odd cases (a child under age 9 has died in Sweden). All of this is to protect the older population and the people in risk groups. If they all get sick together then the health services will become overwhelmed. Triage will be needed to sort out the hopeless cases from the fighting chances.

People who get Covid-19 whilst recovering from a transplant operation stand a huge chance of dying. If they hadn't caught it then they may have lived a longer and happier life. So yes, the man you mention died as a result of contracting Covid-19. Otherweise, as @Min Bannister said, he would still be alive.



Cochise - Yes, there have always ben deadly infectious diseases going around but it's not just that we are "used" to them - we have a medical defense aginst them. We build up immunity to them over time. Which means if YOU have had a heart transplant, and the flu comes around, then you and your family have some natural resistance built up. You may not get it as others in the community are also keeping it at bay. Immunisations may not be for that exact strain of flu but you have some antibodies that can give you a head start.

With this deadly infectious disease, we are the the beginning. No-one around you is immune or has had a jab. No one can act as a fire break, stopping it before it hits you with your new heart. You are then dead. Give it 2 or 3 years and we will have natural fire breaks in the population but as this is so new, we are fully exposed to it. The old, the frail and the sick will die. And there are millions of them in the UK alone who we have to protect until we can build up enough of an immunity to limit their exposure.


But if everyone is locked away how can they build up immunity?

Please don't think I'm being dogmatic about this. I don't know what the right thing is to do. But I have learned in life to try and look at the future consequences of things, and it seems to me, on balance, that this total lockdown is doing more harm than good. Please note I'm not suggesting that no measures should have been taken.

(I'm fed up with the modern approach to debate where person a) is a strong believer in something and if person b) disagrees with some of the details they are assumed to be an enemy. This has been going for years and it is completely counter-productive)

I've listed my fears about the consequences of the total lockdown before, I'm not going to keep banging on about them , but I notice that no-one on here has engaged in that part of the debate.

And it's not as though their isn't genuine scientific debate about the situation. Many observers in other countries seem to think that the UK has somehow managed to combine the worst of all three approaches adopted by other countries (basically Total Lockdown, Social Distancing, Track and Trace with immigration checks.)

The approach the UK has taken in having no checks at ports seems to me to be bordering on the criminal. I understand that there are too many people traveling to quarantine them all, but surely a check to see if someone is running a fever and selective quarantining of those coming in from danger spots could have been done? It is far too late now.

And then there is this:

https://www.aier.org/article/lockdo...anization-interview-with-prof-johan-giesecke/
 
Last edited:

Ringo

I like to not get involved in these matters
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
5,097
Points
239
Location
Stockholm
But if everyone is locked away how can they build up immunity?
...
I've listed my fears about the consequences of the total lockdown before, I'm not going to keep banging on about them , but I notice that no-one on here has engaged in that part of the debate.

And it's not as though their isn't genuine scientific debate about the situation. Many observers in other countries seem to think that the UK has somehow managed to combine the worst of all three approaches adopted by other countries (basically Total Lockdown, Social Distancing, Track and Trace with immigration checks.)
...
And then there is this:

https://www.aier.org/article/lockdo...anization-interview-with-prof-johan-giesecke/

I agree here completely. No-one can be immune during a lockdown. Which is why it won't work. It will only postpone the inevitable. It is a knee jerk reaction which isn't based on evidence or science. It is just a basic response to a threat - to hide and hope it all goes away. Which it will not do.

I'm willing to engage in this debate. I don't see us as enemies - partly becuase a debate should be fluid and participants willing to change their viewpoints. But also because I think we are in agreement anyway. The lockdown is a bad thing but now that it is in force there has to be a plan for increasing exposure in a controlled manner. Other diseases are just as bad but we are seeing the birth of a new one which is why it is an unknown.

And as for Giesecke's interview, he's very straight forward and matter of fact. Although time has now proven that his guesses at number of deaths was too low for the UK. It's right for Sweden but his rough calculation during the interview was just the Swedish number multiplied by 6 in order to mirror the UK's population. He didn't take into account the density of the UK population.
 

AlienView

"Stargate Explorer"
Joined
Aug 11, 2017
Messages
291
Reaction score
218
Points
44
Location
Cyberspace
And it's not as though their isn't genuine scientific debate about the situation. Many observers in other countries seem to think that the UK has somehow managed to combine the worst of all three approaches adopted by other countries (basically Total Lockdown, Social Distancing, Track and Trace with immigration checks.)

The approach the UK has taken in having no checks at ports seems to me to be bordering on the criminal.

And then there is this:

https://www.aier.org/article/lockdo...anization-interview-with-prof-johan-giesecke/
It wasn't just the UK, the US and most other countries, exempting Sweden took a
similar approach.

The debate now should be whether this was the correct approach?
Did it actually slow the pandemic?

And what will be the consequences in destroying the World's economy?

Will this produce more misery, more death, and actually more disease in the
long run?

It's still not too late - They can still follow the Swedish approach.

Practice social distancing, avoidance of crowds and encourage everyone to where
face masks in public until the worst is over - And stop bankrupting the World's economy for a dubious, at best, lockdown approach.
 

Min Bannister

Possessed dog
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Messages
5,067
Reaction score
7,542
Points
314
In fact the annual average prior to this year is 17,000 for the UK. The recent peak was 28,330 in 2014/5 .
Yes. More people have died from Covid in a little over two months than died in a particularly bad flu outbreak over an entire season (about 6 months) a few years ago. Shows how deadly Covid is, especially since most of us have spent most of that two months shut away instead of going about our normal disease-spreading business.
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,196
Reaction score
10,834
Points
299
Yes. More people have died from Covid in a little over two months than died in a particularly bad flu outbreak over an entire season (about 6 months) a few years ago. Shows how deadly Covid is, especially since most of us have spent most of that two months shut away instead of going about our normal disease-spreading business.

Yes. In all probability shut away with someone carrying the virus.

If 'only' 7 million people have been infected, and assuming the average locked down group is 3, that means the chance of being locked down with someone who has the virus is approximately 1 in 4. And of course you aren't going to wear masks, gloves etc. in your own house.

edit: that is assuming an even spread. If we assume that London, for example, has much more exposure to incoming viruses than, say, Aberystwith, then the chances of a Londoner being locked in with someone happily shedding spores everywhere is greatly increased.
 

Ringo

I like to not get involved in these matters
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
5,097
Points
239
Location
Stockholm
Yes. More people have died from Covid in a little over two months than died in a particularly bad flu outbreak over an entire season (about 6 months) a few years ago. Shows how deadly Covid is, especially since most of us have spent most of that two months shut away instead of going about our normal disease-spreading business.

Quite. I want to make a joke here about you spreading your disease-riddled business everywhere but I will refrain.
 

Min Bannister

Possessed dog
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Messages
5,067
Reaction score
7,542
Points
314
Yes. In all probability shut away with someone carrying the virus.
Yes, there will be people who catch it regardless of measure taken to slow the spread. Hopefully as many of those people as possible will be contributing to the "herd immunity" stats than the death/permanent debility (sp?) stats. :(
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,196
Reaction score
10,834
Points
299
Yes, there will be people who catch it regardless of measure taken to slow the spread. Hopefully as many of those people as possible will be contributing to the "herd immunity" stats than the death/permanent debility (sp?) stats. :(
Agreed :)
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,196
Reaction score
10,834
Points
299
Quite. I want to make a joke here about you spreading your disease-riddled business everywhere but I will refrain.
you sh*t-stirrer you :)

Edit: - you see, that's why I was a rubbish high-powered executive - there are few situations no matter how black that I can't find an inappropriate pun in .
 

Naughty_Felid

kneesy earsy nosey
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
9,047
Reaction score
12,680
Points
299
In fact the annual average prior to this year is 17,000 for the UK. The recent peak was 28,330 in 2014/5 .

'fighting the pandemic' - or just doing your job? That probably sounds nastier than I meant it to. What I mean is, that if you work in heath care, dealing with an epidemic is something that most people in such jobs will deal with maybe once in a lifetime, but they do happen at roughly 50 year intervals.

I dislike the 'war on ' rhetoric whether it is drugs or illness. Much nastier things happen in war than people dying of illness.
Well that's different I got my figure fromn the oxford university vaccine knowledge project. Can anyone explain the difference? Mine was based on a quick Google and I don't have time to look into it at the mo?
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,196
Reaction score
10,834
Points
299
Well that's different I got my figure fromn the oxford university vaccine knowledge project. Can anyone explain the difference? Mine was based on a quick Google and I don't have time to look into it at the mo?
I think mine came from the ONS. Of course if you go further back there are really bad years like 68/9 - 80,000+ deaths.

I used to work in the next door building to the ONS back in the 70's - not relevant, just brought back some old memories.
 
Last edited:

Min Bannister

Possessed dog
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Messages
5,067
Reaction score
7,542
Points
314
Well that's different I got my figure fromn the oxford university vaccine knowledge project. Can anyone explain the difference? Mine was based on a quick Google and I don't have time to look into it at the mo?
I think I can but unfortunately I can't find the original report that I read about this to reference it :rolleyes:. But it is basically that flu statistics are actually very difficult to collect. Hence why it is also difficult to find death rates for flu. There is no way to actually tell how many people have had flu. And as we have been finding out, many people die in care homes without ever going to hospital. This bit is all common sense when you think about it.

There is another factor, which I attach a warning to as I am relying on my memory/reading of the paper. And that is that often the figures that are collected are actually coming from excess deaths in a year and not from death certificates or flu tests. So the figures that we are getting could well be overestimates in many cases. Hence from one source you get 17, 000 and from another you get 12, 000. It may actually be less than that.

I will have a proper search a bit later I promise! I probably got it from pubmed which is why I can't find it from an intetnet search.
 

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
2,561
Reaction score
4,098
Points
154
IDK if people have bumped into this article regarding suspicious behavior in China. Apparently in the Wuhan Institute of Virology from October 7-24th in 2019 there was a mobile phone blackout/shut down/ lack of calls logged:
US and UK intelligence agencies 'examining report on mobile phone data in Wuhan Virus Lab.

Remembering that Shi Zhengli - China's pre-eminent coronavirus specialist was working at that lab and has been out of circulation, with many fearing for her: Shi Zhengli's work Shi Zhengli goes missing
Shi Zhengli certainly worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Shi Zhengli initially said that she was certain that her lab had not released the virus, but later was seen to question herself on the matter i.e. "Could we have released the virus?" She asks.

This is not to suggest that China deliberately released the virus, or that they manufactured the virus, but they may well have failed to manage its safe handling adequately.

China is desperate to save face, and obviously doesn't want to be held accountable for covid-19, and that is why the CCP is using underhanded methods to try to prevent an international inquiry into its mishandling of events. We all know they mishandled matters, the question is, how badly and for how long? If this Telegraph article is to be believed, it may be far longer than anyone supposed.

I am interested in any subsidiary evidence or criticism that people have of the Telegraph article, whether for or against.
 

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
7,196
Reaction score
10,834
Points
299
IDK if people have bumped into this article regarding suspicious behavior in China. Apparently in the Wuhan Institute of Virology from October 7-24th in 2019 there was a mobile phone blackout/shut down/ lack of calls logged:
US and UK intelligence agencies 'examining report on mobile phone data in Wuhan Virus Lab.

Remembering that Shi Zhengli - China's pre-eminent coronavirus specialist was working at that lab and has been out of circulation, with many fearing for her: Shi Zhengli's work Shi Zhengli goes missing
Shi Zhengli certainly worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Shi Zhengli initially said that she was certain that her lab had not released the virus, but later was seen to question herself on the matter i.e. "Could we have released the virus?" She asks.

This is not to suggest that China deliberately released the virus, or that they manufactured the virus, but they may well have failed to manage its safe handling adequately.

China is desperate to save face, and obviously doesn't want to be held accountable for covid-19, and that is why the CCP is using underhanded methods to try to prevent an international inquiry into its mishandling of events. We all know they mishandled matters, the question is, how badly and for how long? If this Telegraph article is to be believed, it may be far longer than anyone supposed.

I am interested in any subsidiary evidence or criticism that people have of the Telegraph article, whether for or against.
The timing certainly fits.
 

AlienView

"Stargate Explorer"
Joined
Aug 11, 2017
Messages
291
Reaction score
218
Points
44
Location
Cyberspace
Remembering that Shi Zhengli - China's pre-eminent coronavirus specialist was working at that lab and has been out of circulation, with many fearing for her: Shi Zhengli's work Shi Zhengli goes missing
Shi Zhengli certainly worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Shi Zhengli initially said that she was certain that her lab had not released the virus, but later was seen to question herself on the matter i.e. "Could we have released the virus?" She asks.


"It may be inferred that China is covering up the issue, which itself is a grave and inhumane act during this pandemic. Thus, even if there exists a remote suspicion that China has deliberately used COVID-19 as a biological weapon for committing bio-terrorism, there must be a proper trial held and every suspected authority must be a party.

The People’s Republic of China, Major General Chen Wie and Shi Zhengli, Director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, are the defendants in the Freedom Watch petition. The defendants dealt with the handling of the virus during the pre-pandemic and must be subject to proper investigation. If China is found to guilty of the deliberate release of COVID-19 during the investigation, there would be violations of several treaties China is a party to:....................."
See whole article here:
https://www.jurist.org/commentary/2020/04/yadav-bajpai-covid-conspiracy/

Of course common sense dictates that blaming China and trying to get compensation might lead to World War Three !!!!

Probably better to stick to bats from the Wuhan Market.
 
Last edited:

Min Bannister

Possessed dog
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Messages
5,067
Reaction score
7,542
Points
314
I think I can but unfortunately I can't find the original report that I read about this to reference it :rolleyes:.
I found it and I remembered correctly.

https://straightstatistics.fullfact.org/article/flu-deaths-triumph-statistics-not-virology

Lots in that link relevant to discussion here by the way. It is quite interesting. For an article on statistics..

Very few deaths are ever proven to have been caused by flu alone, just a handful in most years. The rest are the result of examining “excess deaths” in the weeks of the year in which flu is widespread, and attributing a proportion of them to the complications of flu, such as pneumonia. Anybody reading this would conclude that flu “causes” an average of 12,000 deaths a year in the UK. Sometimes even higher figures are quoted, up to 25,000 deaths a year. But in fact all we can say for certain is that flu causes a few tens of deaths a year, and is associated with a few thousand: in recent years, considerably fewer than 12,000.
 

Tribble

Killjoy Boffin
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Messages
2,993
Reaction score
6,907
Points
209
Thus, even if there exists a remote suspicion that China has deliberately used COVID-19 as a biological weapon for committing bio-terrorism

Hanlon's razor.

Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.


If harm was intended with a biological agent, they'd have released something a lot deadlier, in another country (with a source traceable to that country, e.g. infect local wildlife before letting it "jump" to humans), and have a vaccine conveniently ready in record time so they could profit/be seen as technologically superior/have leverage over the rest of the world.

Well, that's what I'd do, anyway. (Note to any intelligence agency monitoring these forums : I didn't, I deny everything, and I didn't order that lab equipment)
 

Trevp666

It was like that when I got here.........honest!!!
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
5,690
Reaction score
15,509
Points
299
Location
Welwyn Garden City (but oddly, not an actual city)
Thanks for that Min - it was a very interesting read (and is there a more recent report like this?)

An interesting line in that was;
"...Among the lessons learned was the need for better seroprevalence data – tests to show how widespread the infection was. Without them, no sensible estimate could be made of the case-fatality ratio. ..."

Bearing in mind that report is from ten years ago it's surprising that better testing (both quantity and facilities) were not instigated back then, including both antigen and antibody testing, in readiness for when another epidemic came along (such as the current one!).
It's also surprising that even back then, the scientists working on studying the swine flu came out with figures for possible infections and deaths that, like nowadays, covered a very large range indeed - I wonder how much was learned from that and if improvements on modelling/forecasting have been made or not? (It would seem not, but them I'm no scientist so couldn't possibly have a pertinent comment to make in that area).
Interesting stuff.
 
Top