The Vaccine has landed- a giant step for mankind !!!

"Died with covid is different to dying of Covid." really there is no difference as due to covid you are dead.

Figures as of October last year (latest figures I could see available)

Died of Covid (i.e. no other contributing factor at all so death can only be attributed to COVID) - 4,476
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transpar ... ndownbyage

Died with Covid (i.e deceased had been diagnosed with COVID within 28 days of dying but COVID cannot be confirmed as the contributory factor in death as there were other co-morbidities involved) - 47,523
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths

Arguments can be made that COVID had little or massive adverse effect on those who died with other co-morbidities but ultimately that is just speculation either way as the data isn't available (at least anywhere I've seen).

All we can say is that absolutely verifiable deaths from COVID are slightly less than a tenth of all deaths reported as died with COVID.

Then the percentage of those who died with COVID alongside other co-morbidities where COVID was the contributing factor to their death is pretty much unknown. It could be 10% or it could 90%. However, the daily death ticker at the top of the news only ever reflected the very worst-case scenario.

I'm not really sure how else Nukes could have phrased it other than 'dying with COVID' vs 'dying of COVID' while making the point he was making, which is a valid one. The two are statistically very different things.

"Died with covid is different to dying of Covid." really there is no difference as due to covid you are dead.

Figures as of October last year (latest figures I could see available)

Died of Covid (i.e. no other contributing factor at all so death can only be attributed to COVID) - 4,476
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transpar ... ndownbyage

Died with Covid (i.e deceased had been diagnosed with COVID within 28 days of dying but COVID cannot be confirmed as the contributory factor in death as there were other co-morbidities involved) - 47,523
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths

Arguments can be made that COVID had little or massive adverse effect on those who died with other co-morbidities but ultimately that is just speculation either way as the data isn't available (at least anywhere I've seen).

All we can say is that absolutely verifiable deaths from COVID are slightly less than a tenth of all deaths reported as died with COVID.

Then the percentage of those who died with COVID alongside other co-morbidities where COVID was the contributing factor to their death is pretty much unknown. It could be 10% or it could 90%. However, the daily death ticker at the top of the news only ever reflected the very worst-case scenario.

I'm not really sure how else Nukes could have phrased it other than 'dying with COVID' vs 'dying of COVID' while making the point he was making, which is a valid one. The two are statistically very different things.

The problem with no comorbidities is that the majority of the UK have a condition that would be a Co morbidity.
Obesity, asthma, depression, diabetes, and plenty others would all be co morbidities.

To broaden it to other causes of death, 91% of people living with dementia also have another health condition. Heart failure deaths have 4 Co morbidities on average. Surprisingly, no one makes a song and dance about dying with or from them.

"Died with covid is different to dying of Covid." really there is no difference as due to covid you are dead.

Figures as of October last year (latest figures I could see available)

Died of Covid (i.e. no other contributing factor at all so death can only be attributed to COVID) - 4,476
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transpar ... ndownbyage

Died with Covid (i.e deceased had been diagnosed with COVID within 28 days of dying but COVID cannot be confirmed as the contributory factor in death as there were other co-morbidities involved) - 47,523
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths

Arguments can be made that COVID had little or massive adverse effect on those who died with other co-morbidities but ultimately that is just speculation either way as the data isn't available (at least anywhere I've seen).

All we can say is that absolutely verifiable deaths from COVID are slightly less than a tenth of all deaths reported as died with COVID.

Then the percentage of those who died with COVID alongside other co-morbidities where COVID was the contributing factor to their death is pretty much unknown. It could be 10% or it could 90%. However, the daily death ticker at the top of the news only ever reflected the very worst-case scenario.

I'm not really sure how else Nukes could have phrased it other than 'dying with COVID' vs 'dying of COVID' while making the point he was making, which is a valid one. The two are statistically very different things.

The problem with no comorbidities is that the majority of the UK have a condition that would be a Co morbidity.
Obesity, asthma, depression, diabetes, and plenty others would all be co morbidities.

To broaden it to other causes of death, 91% of people living with dementia also have another health condition. Heart failure deaths have 4 Co morbidities on average. Surprisingly, no one makes a song and dance about dying with or from them.

Yes, but that doesn't alter the fact that there is a distinct statistical difference between dying from covid and dying with covid. As I said it could be that covid is a massive factor in those deaths with comorbidities equally it could be insignificant. The truth is almost certainly somewhere in between but the headlines present the worst case scenario despite there appearing to not be data to confirm either way.

I'd suggest more attention on covid comorbidities than other illness because we have never been put under draconian lockdowns because of dementia etc so people are rightly questioning whether the cure is more damaging than the disease.

"Died with covid is different to dying of Covid." really there is no difference as due to covid you are dead.

Figures as of October last year (latest figures I could see available)

Died of Covid (i.e. no other contributing factor at all so death can only be attributed to COVID) - 4,476
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transpar ... ndownbyage

Died with Covid (i.e deceased had been diagnosed with COVID within 28 days of dying but COVID cannot be confirmed as the contributory factor in death as there were other co-morbidities involved) - 47,523
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths

Arguments can be made that COVID had little or massive adverse effect on those who died with other co-morbidities but ultimately that is just speculation either way as the data isn't available (at least anywhere I've seen).

All we can say is that absolutely verifiable deaths from COVID are slightly less than a tenth of all deaths reported as died with COVID.

Then the percentage of those who died with COVID alongside other co-morbidities where COVID was the contributing factor to their death is pretty much unknown. It could be 10% or it could 90%. However, the daily death ticker at the top of the news only ever reflected the very worst-case scenario.

I'm not really sure how else Nukes could have phrased it other than 'dying with COVID' vs 'dying of COVID' while making the point he was making, which is a valid one. The two are statistically very different things.

The problem with no comorbidities is that the majority of the UK have a condition that would be a Co morbidity.
Obesity, asthma, depression, diabetes, and plenty others would all be co morbidities.

To broaden it to other causes of death, 91% of people living with dementia also have another health condition. Heart failure deaths have 4 Co morbidities on average. Surprisingly, no one makes a song and dance about dying with or from them.

it all depends on the narrative... people who have been admitted to hospital close to death of other causes then get tested covid positive and die...are in the covid numbers....people have always died in hospitals long before covid....die in one now and the chances are your a covid death...
but...have the jab and die shortly after...and apparently the vaccine played no roll, as those that died were elderly, ill or both and would have died anyway...
far to selective... and its been selective over many things from day 1...

Deaths in Gibraltar and Monaco have exploded since the introduction of the vaccine

Monaco had recorded a total of 3 deaths until vaccination started. A month on and that figure has increased by more than 600% to 19

Gibraltar had 7 deaths in total, and after a month of vaccinations are now up to 83 - a terrifying increase

Wow how strange the virus has been imported into those areas and people spreading it, catching it and are dying?

Don't worry about the virus open everything up as it's only like the flu, but what about above?

ps a tiny percentage of the population vaccinated will have very effect on stopping the virus rampage through a community.

Welcome back

"Died with covid is different to dying of Covid." really there is no difference as due to covid you are dead.

Figures as of October last year (latest figures I could see available)

Died of Covid (i.e. no other contributing factor at all so death can only be attributed to COVID) - 4,476
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transpar ... ndownbyage

Died with Covid (i.e deceased had been diagnosed with COVID within 28 days of dying but COVID cannot be confirmed as the contributory factor in death as there were other co-morbidities involved) - 47,523
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths

Arguments can be made that COVID had little or massive adverse effect on those who died with other co-morbidities but ultimately that is just speculation either way as the data isn't available (at least anywhere I've seen).

All we can say is that absolutely verifiable deaths from COVID are slightly less than a tenth of all deaths reported as died with COVID.

Then the percentage of those who died with COVID alongside other co-morbidities where COVID was the contributing factor to their death is pretty much unknown. It could be 10% or it could 90%. However, the daily death ticker at the top of the news only ever reflected the very worst-case scenario.

I'm not really sure how else Nukes could have phrased it other than 'dying with COVID' vs 'dying of COVID' while making the point he was making, which is a valid one. The two are statistically very different things.

The problem with no comorbidities is that the majority of the UK have a condition that would be a Co morbidity.
Obesity, asthma, depression, diabetes, and plenty others would all be co morbidities.

To broaden it to other causes of death, 91% of people living with dementia also have another health condition. Heart failure deaths have 4 Co morbidities on average. Surprisingly, no one makes a song and dance about dying with or from them.

Yes, but that doesn't alter the fact that there is a distinct statistical difference between dying from covid and dying with covid. As I said it could be that covid is a massive factor in those deaths with comorbidities equally it could be insignificant. The truth is almost certainly somewhere in between but the headlines present the worst case scenario despite there appearing to not be data to confirm either way.

I'd suggest more attention on covid comorbidities than other illness because we have never been put under draconian lockdowns because of dementia etc so people are rightly questioning whether the cure is more damaging than the disease.

But you'll rarely be able to know how big a factor one part plays. I have a mate with diabetes, he's perfectly healthy but if he catches corona and dies than your immediately discounting him from the 'true' death figure.

If you're separating them because of government measures why don't we do it for money reasons for the others? We spend hundreds of millions on dementia or cancer as a whole but if you seperated the deaths 'with' and 'from' than I'm sure the deaths from dementia and cancer will only be 1 or 2% of the whole figure. As its now suddenly not deadly we can spend the money elsewhere.

Likewise with healthy eating campaigns, how much do we spend compared to how many people actually die of obesity? The government should save the money and give it to their tory mates.

A very interesting article to throw into the mix
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanc ... 40-6736(21)00193-8/fulltext

A very interesting article to throw into the mix
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanc ... 40-6736(21)00193-8/fulltext

its not linking mate

Deaths in Gibraltar and Monaco have exploded since the introduction of the vaccine

Monaco had recorded a total of 3 deaths until vaccination started. A month on and that figure has increased by more than 600% to 19

Gibraltar had 7 deaths in total, and after a month of vaccinations are now up to 83 - a terrifying increase

Wow how strange the virus has been imported into those areas and people spreading it, catching it and are dying?

Don't worry about the virus open everything up as it's only like the flu, but what about above?

ps a tiny percentage of the population vaccinated will have very effect on stopping the virus rampage through a community.

yes it is strange.. more restrictions more tests more vaccines and more deaths..

Welcome back

A very interesting article to throw into the mix
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanc ... 40-6736(21)00193-8/fulltext

its not linking mate

Opens on what’s app, Messenger and Facebook but not on here. No idea why ?
Here is my Facebook link on it for those that have it. Interesting stats
https://www.facebook.com/10003511783873 ... 267983697/

"Died with covid is different to dying of Covid." really there is no difference as due to covid you are dead.

Figures as of October last year (latest figures I could see available)

Died of Covid (i.e. no other contributing factor at all so death can only be attributed to COVID) - 4,476
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transpar ... ndownbyage

Died with Covid (i.e deceased had been diagnosed with COVID within 28 days of dying but COVID cannot be confirmed as the contributory factor in death as there were other co-morbidities involved) - 47,523
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths

Arguments can be made that COVID had little or massive adverse effect on those who died with other co-morbidities but ultimately that is just speculation either way as the data isn't available (at least anywhere I've seen).

All we can say is that absolutely verifiable deaths from COVID are slightly less than a tenth of all deaths reported as died with COVID.

Then the percentage of those who died with COVID alongside other co-morbidities where COVID was the contributing factor to their death is pretty much unknown. It could be 10% or it could 90%. However, the daily death ticker at the top of the news only ever reflected the very worst-case scenario.

I'm not really sure how else Nukes could have phrased it other than 'dying with COVID' vs 'dying of COVID' while making the point he was making, which is a valid one. The two are statistically very different things.

The problem with no comorbidities is that the majority of the UK have a condition that would be a Co morbidity.
Obesity, asthma, depression, diabetes, and plenty others would all be co morbidities.

To broaden it to other causes of death, 91% of people living with dementia also have another health condition. Heart failure deaths have 4 Co morbidities on average. Surprisingly, no one makes a song and dance about dying with or from them.

Yes, but that doesn't alter the fact that there is a distinct statistical difference between dying from covid and dying with covid. As I said it could be that covid is a massive factor in those deaths with comorbidities equally it could be insignificant. The truth is almost certainly somewhere in between but the headlines present the worst case scenario despite there appearing to not be data to confirm either way.

I'd suggest more attention on covid comorbidities than other illness because we have never been put under draconian lockdowns because of dementia etc so people are rightly questioning whether the cure is more damaging than the disease.

But you'll rarely be able to know how big a factor one part plays. I have a mate with diabetes, he's perfectly healthy but if he catches corona and dies than your immediately discounting him from the 'true' death figure.

If you're separating them because of government measures why don't we do it for money reasons for the others? We spend hundreds of millions on dementia or cancer as a whole but if you seperated the deaths 'with' and 'from' than I'm sure the deaths from dementia and cancer will only be 1 or 2% of the whole figure. As its now suddenly not deadly we can spend the money elsewhere.

Likewise with healthy eating campaigns, how much do we spend compared to how many people actually die of obesity? The government should save the money and give it to their tory mates.

If we had a constant ticker at the top of the news telling us how many people had died of obesity/dementia/heart disease/cancer/influenza etc, if we had our freedoms restricted and killed the economy for them then I'm sure people would also question how big a contributing factor each of those diseases was into the total number of deaths with comorbidities.

Given the unprecedented severity of the reaction to COVID compared to any of the above other diseases surely it is to be expected that there would be greater scrutiny on exactly how significant a contributing factor it is in those who have died having contracted the virus.

As I said it could be a massive factor or an insignificant one and as it stands the data isn't there to confirm one way or another.

However, coverage of this quite important factor in the whole equation is extremely limited and given all of the suffering that we have gone through as a direct result of the measures put in place to mitigate the impact of COVID this seems to be something of a glaring omission amongst the media coverage and also the transparency of the government's approach to policy making.

At the end of the day, the government has to have made a cost-benefit analysis with regards to their response to COVID.

To have done that effectively they have to have some understanding of how big a contributing factor COVID has been in cases of death with co-morbidities. To be honest, they should be able to go further than that and be able to then break that data down by demographic to further understand the magnitude of the problem, who it impacts the worst and how. Your friend with diabetes, for example, does his survival rate move from 99.7% to 90%, 75%, 50%? What about someone who is obese? Someone who has Asthma or a heart murmer?

If we are going to protect the most vulnerable in society surely we need to know who they are and just how significant a risk they are at. As you've mentioned the vast majority of the country could potentially have at least one co-morbidity so realistically we can't continue to protect everyone indefinitely. We have to open back up at some point as there is only so much money the government can print before the ink runs out.

So again this begs the question, given the severity of the response, exactly what data have the government leveraged to make their cost-benefit analysis of the lockdown measures they've introduced?

The fact that this information isn't readily available suggests to me only two possible options.

Either:

a) they don't have it. In which case they are making seriously worrying policy decisions based on incomplete data and thus a limited understanding of the challenge they are trying to overcome

or

b) they have the data and are unwilling to publish it. This would beg the question why not?

These are legitimate questions and they would be legitimate questions of any of the other diseases you mention if the response was of a similar order of magnitude for those as it has been for COVID.

I take your point regarding comparisons to other illnesses and the lack of clarity that lies elsewhere and would suggest that if anything the lack of visibility around COVID policymaking should be used as a catalyst to introduce greater transparency and accountability for any funding decisions regarding government spending.

This should be the case moving forward whether that be on health-related matters or infrastructure or anything else and that plans to overcome the challenges should be evidence-based, open to public scrutiny and all policy decisions should be based on solid factual evidence stripped away of any and all hyperbole and can be robustly and rigorously defended based on those criteria.

Never gonna happen, we're to well absorbed into nanny-state politics now, but is a nice idea.

Deaths in Gibraltar and Monaco have exploded since the introduction of the vaccine

Monaco had recorded a total of 3 deaths until vaccination started. A month on and that figure has increased by more than 600% to 19

Gibraltar had 7 deaths in total, and after a month of vaccinations are now up to 83 - a terrifying increase

Wow how strange the virus has been imported into those areas and people spreading it, catching it and are dying?

Don't worry about the virus open everything up as it's only like the flu, but what about above?

ps a tiny percentage of the population vaccinated will have very effect on stopping the virus rampage through a community.

Yes it's a bugger to stop, do you think it would go away if we didn't vaccinate or have any restrictions?

yes it is strange.. more restrictions more tests more vaccines and more deaths..

Nice bit of good news from SAGE today.

They're effectively saying that regardless of the high take up on vaccines we'll need to have restrictions on our freedoms and have to wear masks forever.

Unfortunately the elected representatives seem happy to be told what to do by the unelected scientists and their guesswork.

What a wonderful future we have to look forward to!

Nice bit of good news from SAGE today.

They're effectively saying that regardless of the high take up on vaccines we'll need to have restrictions on our freedoms and have to wear masks forever.

Unfortunately the elected representatives seem happy to be told what to do by the unelected scientists and their guesswork.

What a wonderful future we have to look forward to!

But on the bright side we can hopefully get a vaccine passport and go on holidays

Jab and Go -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... plans.html

Powerful 'Covid O' Cabinet committee is set to consider plans for 'vaccine passports' tomorrow amid hopes they could save summer holidays
Covid O committee having initial discussions about 'vaccine passports' for travel
Boris Johnson has said having two Covid jabs could allow you to go on holiday
Iata revealed 'fruitful' Government talks about vaccination app for travellers

Nice bit of good news from SAGE today.

They're effectively saying that regardless of the high take up on vaccines we'll need to have restrictions on our freedoms and have to wear masks forever.

Unfortunately the elected representatives seem happy to be told what to do by the unelected scientists and their guesswork.

What a wonderful future we have to look forward to!

But on the bright side we can hopefully get a vaccine passport and go on holidays

Jab and Go -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... plans.html

Powerful 'Covid O' Cabinet committee is set to consider plans for 'vaccine passports' tomorrow amid hopes they could save summer holidays
Covid O committee having initial discussions about 'vaccine passports' for travel
Boris Johnson has said having two Covid jabs could allow you to go on holiday
Iata revealed 'fruitful' Government talks about vaccination app for travellers

In reality lets keep the borders tight until a lot more vaccinations have been done, we don't want to undo all the good work by importing some vaccine resistant strain from Spain or Greece!

Agreed it's a massive number of people who have been vaccinated and it has so far worked extremely well and is very safe, some people have taken a stance and would prefer it to fail and will constantly look for hope that they can eventually find something they can criticise it, but they can't find anything which is great news.

I feel for you, I really do. You are blinded by MSM propaganda but you still spout their bullshit.

I believe in free will, and equally people to discern for themselves whether something is right or wrong.

There is no proof that this vaccine works....FACT.......but people will believe what they want to believe, and I salute them for that.

Just because I have made a choice not to inject myself with foreign bodies and particles, this should not affect anyone elses decision making process.

A study in Israel of 1.2 million people has found there was a 94 per cent decrease in the rate of symptomatic infection and a 92 per cent decrease in the rate of serious illness in those vaccinated, compared to 600,000 who were not vaccinated. They also expect that number to significantly increase when people have the second jab.

Is that enough proof that the vaccine works?

Agreed it's a massive number of people who have been vaccinated and it has so far worked extremely well and is very safe, some people have taken a stance and would prefer it to fail and will constantly look for hope that they can eventually find something they can criticise it, but they can't find anything which is great news.

I feel for you, I really do. You are blinded by MSM propaganda but you still spout their bullshit.

I believe in free will, and equally people to discern for themselves whether something is right or wrong.

There is no proof that this vaccine works....FACT.......but people will believe what they want to believe, and I salute them for that.

Just because I have made a choice not to inject myself with foreign bodies and particles, this should not affect anyone elses decision making process.

A study in Israel of 1.2 million people has found there was a 94 per cent decrease in the rate of symptomatic infection and a 92 per cent decrease in the rate of serious illness in those vaccinated, compared to 600,000 who were not vaccinated. They also expect that number to significantly increase when people have the second jab.

Is that enough proof that the vaccine works?

Some people have watched too many daft video's on the internet.

Could be interesting tonight 10:45pm Wales - 19-35 England

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000scy8