According to Half-Whitty, I am not a conspiracy theorist, which is nice of him.
England’s chief medical officer said he has been left ‘saddened’ by the proportion of unvaccinated patients in intensive care.
Okay.
Speaking at a Downing Street news conference, Professor Sir Chris Whitty said ‘the great majority’ of those who were in intensive care and had not been jabbed were ‘not anti-vaxxers in the ordinary sense with some really weird ideas’ but had been taken advantage of by those seeking to misinform them online.
Sir Chris said ‘misinformation’ on the internet, ‘a lot of it deliberately placed’, about potential side effects from jabs was fuelling fears about whether Covid-19 was important enough to warrant vaccination, leading to vaccine hesitancy.
That ‘misinformation‘ has come from ONS statistics, listening to professionals in the field, such as Sunetra Gupta (professor in epidemiology) and Carl Heneghan (professor in evidence based medicine) and others likewise qualified people in the field who disagree with the likes of Half-Whitty, who dare to apply the scientific process as it is supposed to be applied. People who are well qualified to speak on the subject, yet according to this scoundrel, that is ‘misinformation‘.
I am also able to look at the news and distil the lies from the truth by simply going back to the source – which is all too often the government’s own figures. All you have to do is put context into the raw figures they present to get fuller picture. Now, as time goes on, my initial misgivings have been increasingly proved to be correct. I’ll continue to take Half-Whitty and his fellow charlatans’ words with the pinch of salt they so richly deserve.
‘It’s absolutely heartbreaking that as many as 90% of those in intensive care with Covid have not had their booster, and over 60% of those in intensive care who have Covid have not had any vaccination at all.
I’ve mentioned this before, but it’s worth repeating. This statement is bollocks without context. In my city, we have 48 ICU beds in the local hospital. 90% is as near as dammit, 44 beds. Yup even if 90% is accurate, that 44 people out of 1.2 million. So who is is engaging in deliberate misinformation here?
What an arse.
And of course the epidemic of little notices in the paper saying ‘Local man dies suddenly’ has nothing to do with the vaccines of course.
I said when all this started that unless the vaccines caused a pile of bodies in the vaccination centres themselves, it really didn’t matter how many they killed once they left them. All subsequent deaths would be attributed to whatever disease killed the person, and the role of the vaccine in causing that disease would be airbrushed out of history. So a 65year old man has his vaccine and goes home and few weeks later has an ‘unexpected’ heart attack, thats just another elderly man having a heart attack. Nothing to see here.
An American health insurance company boss let the cat out of the bag the other day, when he said that deaths among those of working age insured by his company were running 40% above normal rates. He was trying to make the suitably ‘on target’ point that covid is causing lots of deaths that aren’t necessarily being put down as covid deaths, and was actually suggesting that his company would increase premiums to companies in areas with low vaccination rates to compensate for this extra risk. It appears to never have occurred to him that the precise opposite could well be the case – the vaccines were causing the higher death rates, and if anything he should be offering lower rates to the unvaccinated.
If we continue to see elevated overall death rates in Western populations, even when covid deaths are accounted for, then it will be interesting how long the Establishment line can hold. The one number they cannot fiddle is the number of corpses. They can mess around with definitions and statistics, but the raw number of deaths is hard to hide.
So that means 30% were vaccinated but not boosted…
Notwithstanding the fact that among the elderly unvaccinated, many were deemed too fragile to take the vaccine so 60% doesn’t mean much.
None of it means anything. They are hoping that people won’t dissect their statements and put them into context. Anyway, not boosted is the new anti-vaxx.
Your numbers are too generous LR – he said 90% of those in ICU with covid. So of the 48 beds perhaps only 10 are occupied by patients who have tested positive for covid. Of those, an even smaller number are likely to be there because of covid.
The ICU has 48 beds for a reason (and the number was likely the same or similar before all this started) – because that’s the normal capacity required in ICU for patients needing that level of care from all causes.
Agreed, I was being generous. But even being generous, we are talking tiny numbers, which, of course, is my point.
People are fond of accusing the ‘unvaxxed’ of ‘filling up ICU beds and blocking treatment to a sick person’, but how many of the vaxxed are currently ‘filling up ICU beds and blocking treatment to a sick person’ due to side effects of the jabs?
Is there anyone out there willing to risk their career to tell us?
When idiots come out with this bollocks, I respond by reminding them that patients are paying customers, not a burden or a cost.
LR – I’m not following your argument here. Are you saying that, because 44 is quite a small number and 1.2 million quite a large one, then no statistical inferences can be drawn? I am not sure that that is a valid argument in this context. If it isn’t your argument, then perhaps you could elaborate.
All I’m doing is putting the statement into context. We do not have a massive problem with covid. It isn’t even in the top five causes of death, yet we are daily bombarded with ridiculous scare stories about ICU being overwhelmed etc, etc. Far from claiming that no statistical inferences can be drawn, I am drawing them myself – that the risk is statistically small.