MovieChat Forums > Politics > Surprising Rise In UK Flu Cases Given Fl...

Surprising Rise In UK Flu Cases Given Flu Had Been Eradicated During Covid-19!


This made me laugh:-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c047ky5qv4ro

Considering the incredible story that Flu had completely disappeared during COVID!

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/flu-cases-covid-england-phe-latest-b1805124.html

Wasn't just in the UK either, Flu disappeared (! πŸ˜‚) in the US as well during COVID....

(Edit - Following link added, meant to attach earlier hence the "US as well" comment above)
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flu-has-disappeared-worldwide-during-the-covid-pandemic1/

reply

The flu hasn't disappeared, it has been and remains to be the most deadly virus in the history of the world.
No other virus has existed for such a long time and has killed remotely as many people as the flu has.
The reason for the "success" of the flu is simply that the mortality rate is so small that humanity never had a reason to eradicate it while producing more babies than the flu kills people is sufficient for the survival of the species.

The point or problem or whatever you want to call it is, that the common cold, the flu and Covid-19 are all members of the same family of viruses and without analysis in a laboratory you cannot tell which of them anyone is infected with.
Furthermore the very same measures are effective against all of them, wearing masks and social distancing reduces the spread of all these viruses, therefore the lockdowns, mandating wearing masks and all the other things they did against Covid-19 had the very same effect against the flu.

Furthermore many people (myself included) never took a vaccination against the flu until Covid-19 came up, but when I got vaccinated for Covid-19 I took a flu vaccination as well.
Not a miracle that now, after there's nobody pushing for vaccinations anymore, nobody is wearing masks in public and nobody does social distancing, not only Covid-19 cases but also cases of common cold and flu are on the rise again.

reply

The point or problem or whatever you want to call it is, that the common cold, the flu and Covid-19 are all members of the same family of viruses and without analysis in a laboratory you cannot tell which of them anyone is infected with.
Furthermore the very same measures are effective against all of them, wearing masks and social distancing reduces the spread of all these viruses, therefore the lockdowns, mandating wearing masks and all the other things they did against Covid-19 had the very same effect against the flu.

Exactly!

reply

So NPI's -- wearing masks and social distancing -- worked against the flu but not against Covid? How do you explain that? Remember, we were told during 2020-2021 that the common strains of influenza had all but disappeared but meanwhile Covid was allegedly raging through the population.

Also, there's a reason they call it the "flu shot" and not the "flu vaccine". There's never been a claim that it's sterilizing, not to mention the fact that each year's formulation (in the States at least) is a crap shoot based on the previous season's strain from Australia. At best, it's still only effective in a small minority of the people who get it. Whether more people were getting those shots a couple years ago wouldn't explain why the flu allegedly disappeared.

reply

Not working against Covid is a claim without evidence, come back when you have evidence in scientifically supported numbers, until then we go by "what is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
Same thing for the flu vaccine, you're pulling wild assertions out of your a**.

reply

What assertion, are you living under a rock? ... The masks, the lockdowns, the distancing and vaccines never worked; it was all a scam.

reply

Tell you what, champ, why don't you start by providing scientifically supported statistics that demonstrate mask mandates and social distancing impacted the spread of covid or any other respiratory virus.

This: Furthermore the very same measures are effective against all of them, wearing masks and social distancing reduces the spread of all these viruses, therefore the lockdowns, mandating wearing masks and all the other things they did against Covid-19 had the very same effect against the flu. is the very definition of pulling wild assertions out of one's ass.

reply

He doesn't have to (but see my other reply below, never the less). The claim here by tv is that 'the masks, the lockdowns, the distancing and vaccines never worked' so he has the onus. When in a previous exchange it was shown to him via several sources, that they did, he just rejected the sources outright with none of his own. Plus Γ§a change.

reply

Nothing new there, the basis of virtually all absurd CTs is that everything that doesn't fit the theory must be false and part of the conspiracy.
You can't get through that, because no matter what you could say, no matter how much solid proof your give them, it's all declared false on the initial assumption that ... (see my previous sentence)
Remember when they claimed all the vaccinated ones would be dead in a few years?

reply

Yes I entirely agree lol. The only genuine cause for concern in regards to treatment during the epidemic, as I understand it, was with the use of ventilators, which always require proper management. The death level of those ventilated was alarmingly high - until one realises that for those so treated it really was a last chance saloon so fatalities often reflected that.

reply

I've had a close friend here who got diagnosed with Covid-19 the same day he was supposed to get vaccinated in the first round right after vaccines became available in Italy, meaning he didn't get vaccinated but hospitalized that day.
He must have had such a high initial load that he went from no symptoms to needing a ventilator within 2 days, been on that for 4 weeks and afterwards the lack of oxygene his brain suffered despite the ventilator had erased 3/4 of his brain, he didn't even know his own name anymore and wasn't able to move a finger because his brain had forgotten how to do that.
That was in 2020, he was totally helpless since and died last week.

reply

Very sorry to hear that. Ventilators were really rough on patients.

reply

It's ok, I wasn't looking for condolences, just ment to throw in a fitting real life experience to your previous post.
I live close to the epicenter of the first outbreak of Covid-19 in Europe, everybody here has known people who died in the first wave before vaccines became available and given that experience of everybody here, I do not know anyone who didn't get vaccinated.

reply

"Ventilators were really rough on patients."


Thats an understatement.

reply

"Ventilators were really rough on patients."


Thats an understatement.

reply

I heard you the first time...

reply

So no evidence, then, that NPI's were effective, despite the emphatic claim that they were.

reply

You just ignored the evidence AGAIN.
filmflaneur pointed you to it, if you refuse to read it you cannot claim it isn't there, because that's as childish as pre school kids are when they see something scary, hold their hands before their eyes and pretend that scary thing isn't there.
Different from you, we do not believe that a false statement could become true if only you repeat it often enough, we showed you the evidence and if all you do is ignore it and repeatedly deny it even exists, all you get from us is a well deserved spot on the ignore list among the other advice resistant fools.

reply

Prove that you’re not a mindless drone and that you can think critically without relying on the internet.

If social distancing worked than why the need for masks?

If the masks worked than why the need for lockdowns?

If the lockdowns worked than why the need for a vaccination?

If the vaccinations worked than why the need for distancing, masks and lockdowns?

reply

Because the battle against Covid necessarily utilized a range of medical approaches, duh. It is not that hard to understand. Or maybe it is.

you can think critically without relying on the internet.


We don't all have your ability to argue entirely without sources.

reply

That doesn't answer any of my questions.

Thanks for proving that you're incapable of critical/independent thinking and that you're a mindless drone that can't think for yourself.

Evasion and Deflection noted ... as usual.

reply

That doesn't answer any of my questions.


And which question does "Because the battle against Covid necessarily utilized a range of medical approaches" not answer? Each method of combating Covid complemented the other. It is that simple.

reply

Each method of combating Covid complemented the other.

Prove it without citing or quoting any internet scriptures.

reply

1. If social distancing, masks vaccinations and lockdowns work individually against Covid

2. And these treatments together are called "complimentary"

3. Then combining social distancing, masks, vaccination and lockdowns are working complimentary treatments against Covid.

Glad to help. Have you anything else to add, or it is back to insults for you now?

reply

I'm still waiting for proof. "Complimentary" is not proof of anything.

reply

That was a logical proof that combined treatments compliment each other, as asked for. Are you saying that they do not? Show it then without references to outside sources (won't be a stretch that, for you)...

But, please also example the sort of proof you would accept without any outside references and source.

reply

My four questions are also self-explanatory and they answer themselves.

None of them worked and the need for "each" mandate is proof that the other(s) never worked.

Your gaslighting excuse of "complimentary" proves nothing and refutes nothing.

reply

None of them worked


Please prove then - without reference to 'internet scriptures' (not a problem for you).

Your gaslighting excuse of "complimentary" proves nothing


It was a stand alone logical proof that combining social distancing, masks, vaccination and lockdowns are working complimentary treatments just as you asked for. If it was not so, then disprove it. Again: are you saying that they do not compliment each other? Why?

gaslighting


Please explain.

reply

Exactly.

reply

What evidence? flimflam linked to a couple of news articles in which a common theme appears: "scientists believe masks work to inhibit the spread of (insert virus)." Well, scientists may also believe that one should match his tie to his socks, but in both cases these beliefs reside in the realm of opinion. He provided one journal article, that of PubMed. It too provides no controllable method for establishing the effectiveness of masks. Furthermore, when discussing social distancing it claims to rely on data derived from various cell phone applications. The problem with this is glaringly obvious, such usage isn't universal. Baidu, for example, may track the interaction between two people but be completely incapable of accounting for dozens or hundreds of others in the vicinity. That alone makes any data from this source completely worthless.

And none of these answer the very simple question: if these measures stopped the flu dead in its tracks, how is it that they appear to have had no effect whatsoever on covid, which is spread through thoroughly identical mechanisms?

reply

Byebye, make yourself comfortable on the ignore list

reply

Hopefully you've learned that your opinions are just that. This entire debate began with you flatly asserting that NPIs were effective, despite not offering one scintilla of evidence. It was always incumbant upon you, and other masktards like flimflam, to provide evidence. You both failed miserably.

I suspect you're used to internet echo chambers where everyone agrees with you. That you now choose to run away is hardly surprising. Even flimflam continues to engage and even makes sense from time to time. You should watch and take notes, you pussy.

reply

He evades and flimflam intercedes for him almost every time. He's either a coward or a sock.

reply

The WHO relabeled it as covid-19 making it the biggest scam in world history ... Then they used lying fact checkers to convince the gullible and weak minded sheep.

https://i.postimg.cc/XJF1Ykvp/Flu-vs-Covid.png

But Muh Fact Checker said

reply

Yeah, exactly what I was getting at. That graphic really rams it home.

It was so utterly stupid even at the time - I remember laughing about how ridiculous it was even at the time but yet people completely swallowed it that flu had completely disappeared!

reply

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the influenza virus had a very low prevalence, and in many areas, outbreaks were almost non-existent. ... In mid-2020, most countries analyzed had high levels of infection control measures, and in most countries, influenza was drastically reduced compared to previous years. ... results support the notion that seasonal influenza is controllable through effective preventive measures, especially those of mask use and human social contact, and these measures should be recommended during future waves of novel influenza virus infection.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9862942/

see also

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flu-has-disappeared-worldwide-during-the-covid-pandemic1/

https://www.unmc.edu/healthsecurity/transmission/2024/03/13/as-covid-spread-a-strain-of-flu-disappeared-now-scientists-say-a-second-could-go-too/

https://www.pharmexec.com/view/flu-strain-wiped-out-covid-19-pandemic

All to be dismissed outright, no doubt.

I await links showing that, on the contrary, flu was prevelant as ever during this time. Or even better, proving a conspiracy as we all like those. But there won't be.

reply

Eh? Sorry, I don't understand - Did you mean to reply to me?

You're just saying exactly what I was pointing out - In fact I meant to attach that Scientific American link myself to the OP but I see it's missing. I must have overwritten it when I added the independent link...

(Will add back in now, thanks πŸ‘)

reply

It was in answer to your

people completely swallowed it that flu had completely disappeared!

reply

Sorry, I'm confused πŸ€·πŸΌβ€β™‚οΈ... You're linking the same sort of things. Is it that you're saying that you believe that flu was wiped out completely by COVID?

reply

That's what the sources tell one. Do you have any that say otherwise, which are not just opinion -
such as tv's claim of a 'scam'? If I have misunderstood your comments following his and just quoted btw, then, apologies. They do seem at odds with your OP.

Incidentally it was not that flu was wiped out by Covid (and even then not every strain of flu) but that the measures put in place to reduce and contain the spread of Covid were exactly the same which worked to bring levels of flu right down to what was insignificant.

reply

That's what the sources tell one. Do you have any that say otherwise...

Sorry, I really don't get you... Why would you expect me to provide sources that would say otherwise as I am agreeing with you?!! I literally said I meant to put one of your links in the OP and in fact have now edited it, so it is there...

I think maybe you have a different take on what they mean, i.e. I think maybe you're saying you genuinely believe that COVID effectively wiped flu out but I'm not disputing that take that flu was supposed to have disappeared when COVID came along. I'm just saying that sounds like garbage to me.

reply

"It was so utterly stupid even at the time - I remember laughing about how ridiculous it was even at the time but yet people completely swallowed it that flu had completely disappeared!"

Was what you said. It sounds like that you think people were ridiculous in thinking flu had gone. As I said, it appears at odds with your OP. Perhaps it is case that your words need an edit.

I'm not disputing that take that flu was supposed to have disappeared when COVID came along. I'm just saying that sounds like garbage to me.


The links provided show that one strain of flu at least fell to insignificant levels at the time.

reply

Sorry, again as per my previous post I think my confusion was that you thought I was disputing the given figures. Which I wasn't (I just think they were clearly nonsense). Hence why I couldn't understand why you were looking for me to provide alternatives...

But I think I understand you now - You think because I think every instance of flu in the UK being marked as COVID was clearly ridiculous, I should be providing alternative figures. But obviously I cannot, as they were all marked as COVID!

That was really the point of the OP and what I was saying was laughable.

reply

you thought I was disputing the given figures. Which I wasn't (I just think they were clearly nonsense).

By calling them nonsense you in effect dispute their validity.
I think every instance of flu in the UK being marked as COVID was clearly ridiculous,

You seem to think that flu and Covid cannot be distinguished or are not so in official reckoning. It is that idea which is nonsense. Influenza (flu) and COVID-19 are both contagious respiratory illnesses, but they are caused by different viruses and require different vaccines (for instance). Second, the way in which symptoms present themselves in patients is very different. Both the flu and COVID-19 cause a cough and shortness of breath, but overall, COVID-19 symptoms tend to last longer than the flu. Medical experts say COVID-19 symptoms may last for several weeks if not months.

Lately we can see how, typically, covid and other respiratory are measured separately: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-flu-and-covid-19-surveillance-reports-2024-to-2025-season/national-flu-and-covid-19-surveillance-report-3-january-week-1

what I was saying was laughable.


Your words not mine!

reply

Yes, I was absolutely questioning the figures validity. That was my point.

Again, apologies for the confusion.

I wasn't disputing the figures. I was just saying that they're clearly nonsense (in my opinion).

If you want to believe them, that's fine by me πŸ‘πŸΌ.

reply

they're clearly nonsense (in my opinion).


What reason do you have for disputing official data?

reply

As I've already said, I think it would be ridiculous to believe that the flu was completely eradicated for effectively an entire year.

You can get into conspiracy theories if you want to but it will have to be with someone else...

reply

That's it, that you just think it is ridiculous?

"The B/Yamagata lineage was not isolated from April 2020 to August 2021, suggesting that this influenza lineage may have become extinct. Epidemiological and evolutionary characteristics of B/Yamagata viruses, combined with suppressive conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic, may have facilitated strong suppression of global B/Yamagata circulation and the potential extinction of this lineage. "

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-021-00642-4

I don't think anyone is suggesting that all flu strains followed it into oblivion, otherwise where did the resurgence come from?

Yours is the only mention so far of conspiracy theories (apart from tv's claim of a 'scam'). Although the suggestion that official figures are somehow 'doctored' (for some unknown reason) does bring us to that territory.

reply

But it is ridiculous, only a willful ignorant would fall for that obvious nonsense.

Why do you persist in gaslighting others?

This thread is another example of how much you contradict yourself.

Even your own sources prove that it was bullshit.

reply

Why do you persist in gaslighting others? This thread is another example of how much you contradict yourself.


So, please give examples of the 'gaslighting' and demonstrate the contradictions. Why do you persist in making statements and never corroborating what you say?

Even your own sources prove that it was bullshit.


Please show, with that proof, and explain how I am wrong..

reply

Sorry, like I said, I'm not going to argue about something so transparently nonsense.

As I've already said though, if you want to believe that flu instances effectively completely disappeared that's really up to you. I'm not forcing anyone to change what they want to believe πŸ‘.

reply

I'm not going to argue about something so transparently nonsense.


You have your fixed opinions, and are welcome to them

reply

Its all a big lie from BIG Pharma. They want your money and they dont care if you die to get it because there are plenty of more people who will be sick becuase of them - And they can financially exploit them. Us mere normie humans are an endless pit of money for Pharma. We are 1's and 0's to them.

If you get a chance, listen to DR. Mark Hyman and Brigham Buhler. They will open your eyes to BIG Pharma if you have any doubts.

reply

It just depends how long it will still take until average people realize that all doctors, all hospitals and all pharma companies make more profit from sick people than from healthy ones.
In fact it goes far further than that, because all the ones warning about the above also make their money only as long as the above keeps going.

How a solution that would really work in the best interest of the general population would look, I don't know, because so far money interests have always found holes in the system how they could keep their profit going.
Probably eduction and I mean a massively increased level of education, so that average people could see through this themselves without depending on "experts" publishing things about it, could help.

Personally I have developped the habit of triple checking everything concerning my health.
Of course I see a doctor when I feel sick and of course I listen to what he has to say, but as soon as I get home I research the web about everything the doctor just told me and then as 3rd step I look up the scientific literature about this particular case of health problem.
I.e. I had surgery for hernia twice (once per side) last year and I knew all about it before I went to see my doctor for the first time. Was a very short visit at the doctor, told him I believe I have an hernia, he took a look at it for less than 10 seconds, confirmed it and made me an appointment in the hospital. After the first surgery the surgeon told me he had seen the other side would have the same problem soon, I went home to check the web, found loads of articles all saying "one hernia rarely comes alone" and went for the second surgery a few months later.

reply

Covidians: The Flu disappeared in 2020 because we all were masking and Social Distancing!

Also Covidians: COVID IS HERE TO STAY BECAUSE YOU PEOPLE DIDN'T MASK OR DISTANCE REEEeeeeEEEE!!!

πŸ€¦β€β™‚οΈπŸ€¦β€β™‚οΈπŸ€¦β€β™‚οΈ

reply

Funny how the flu just vanished during covid huh? It sure is a mystery.

reply

"The B/Yamagata lineage was not isolated from April 2020 to August 2021, suggesting that this influenza lineage may have become extinct. Epidemiological and evolutionary characteristics of B/Yamagata viruses, combined with suppressive conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic, may have facilitated strong suppression of global B/Yamagata circulation and the potential extinction of this lineage. "

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-021-00642-4

reply

Do you seriously think one of your links is going to convince me of anything?

reply

No. But at least it shows it is not a 'mystery' to anyone else. FootofDavros posted some more links in the OP. For him, the only reason not to believed the data was that it 'sounded ridiculous'. Some people however like to work harder on their scepticism, when every opportunity is enough to think up a conspiracy, don't you think?

reply

The government/hospitals started counting all flu cases as covid cases to make it seem more dangerous than it was. Thats a logical explanation of why the flu "disappeared"

reply

The government/hospitals started counting all flu cases as covid cases


Substantiate please. And why would they do that, just for a year? Also, the phenomenon was noted not in just in one country, see all the links in this thread. Oooh... I sense a world-wide conspiracy coming!

reply

Boy, I'm soooooooo tempted to throw in here an actual global conspiracy that I can prove with scientific data that has existed for over 75 years and exists to this day, been 2 days since this topic here exists and I'm still not sure if it's a good idea.
It would turn both sides of this argument here upside down and with a very few exceptions of people who (like me) believe in peer reviewed scientific data I usually end up being like 3rd wheel that nobody wants.

Anyway, I guess now that I mentioned it you wanna hear about it, don't you?
So while you confirm you want to hear it, let me go and find the links to the scientific articles again (good thing the web preserves these things).

reply

There's no need to substantiate the obvious, a flu that magically disappears for only one year is bullshit to anyone with half a brain.

reply

The government/hospitals started counting all flu cases as covid cases...

Exactly. And there's nothing conspiracy theory about that. It's just obvious.

You either believe that a virus which has been about and killing humans every year, to varying degrees depending upon the strain, for as long as we've been aware was suddenly completely completely eradicated as a result of measures which (as others have pointed out on this thread) had no effect on COVID. Or you believe flu death cases were marked as COVID. It's not exactly rocket science...

... Which would probably be needed to explain why the flu instances more or less bounced straight back up to previous levels the next year.

reply

a result of measures which (as others have pointed out on this thread) had no effect on COVID.


Which 'measures'? Where is the science for the claims? And I still haven't been told why those around the world would all coordinate and do this supposed data fiddle/suppression in the first place. Not a conspiracy. lol

depending upon the strain, for as long as we've been aware was suddenly completely completely eradicated ..

The then predominant flu strain was: the B/Yamagata lineage, as mentioned above. Flu is notoriously quick to mutate.

reply

Where is the science for the claims?

You already provided them in all your inept attempts at gaslighting others.

reply

attempts at gaslighting others.


A favourite pejorative of yours which you throw out, but never example. I doubt if you understand what it means. I can't be making out falsely that people speak in favour of GRT when they are supporting its notions, either explicitly or implicitly, on a thread devoted to it.

And as far as I am aware I have not offered any support for the idea that the treatment of Covid and Flu depend on different measures, In fact the collapse of the current flu strain at the time, as identified in the quote I give below from a link previous. was most likely because measures (mask use, social distancing and stringency of measures taken by authorities) were effective on both.

reply

. Flu is notoriously quick to mutate.

LOL πŸ˜‚. It's funny that you understand, and are happy to state that, in light of you claiming that one strain's removal would account for the virus completely disappearing!

And re your first "point". No there's no conspiracy. Well at least as far as the UK is concerned. The UK government figures were quite clear that death cases were marked as "Death with COVID" even if COVID wasn't the primary cause of death.

i.e. You could have be out riding your bike and been hit by a car and died. If you were found to have COVID in your system, or had tested positive within the past 28 days, you were marked as a "Death with COVID" case. As I said, no conspiracy required...

https://ukhsa.blog.gov.uk/2023/01/27/changes-to-the-way-we-report-on-covid-19-deaths/

"The number of deaths within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test is no longer recommended."

UK Government, 27 January 2023.

reply

It's funny that you understand, and are happy to state that, in light of you claiming that one strain's removal would account for the virus completely disappearing!


But I am not suggesting it disappeared because it mutated. That might explain why it came back. The previously supplied link suggests why the current strain virtually went extinct:

" Three measures of infection control: mask use ratio, social distancing index (an index of human mobility and physical distance obligations), and an index of stringency of measures taken by authorities, In mid-2020, most countries analyzed had high levels of infection control measures, and in most countries, influenza was drastically reduced compared to previous years. Multiple regression analyses compared the study data with data from other seasons. There was an association between high mask use with low influenza detection in all three remaining seasons, an association between a low social distancing index (low mobility and more social contact obligations) with a low influenza detection rate in two seasons, and a marginal significant association of high stringency index with a low influenza detection rate(in 2020-end-seasons). "

which I doubt you read.

. No there's no conspiracy. Well at least as far as the UK is concerned.

LOL
death cases were marked as "Death with COVID", You could have be out riding your bike and been hit by a car and died. If you were found to have COVID in your system, you were marked as a "Death with COVID" case.


When it was said that a death was 'due to' Covid, it just that Covid was the underlying cause of death, or it was the one that started the train of events leading to death. But, good try, if an unfeasible and illogical example.

An interesting link, which actually shows authorities being more scrupulous with the figures after "the emergence of the (different) Omicron variant and increasing levels of immunity from vaccination and previous infection, resulting in protection from severe illness". ie its all still Covid, flu need not apply. But than you anyway.

And I still haven't been told why those around the world would all coordinate and do this supposed data fiddle.

EDIT: "It is extremely unlikely that a coroner would find that someone was involved in a traffic accident, or was the victim of violence, because of having COVID-19 or a positive COVID-19 test -- so they would not mention COVID-19 on the death certificate" QED
https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/definitionofdeathsinvolvingcovid19#:~:text=When%20we%20say%20that%20a%20death%20was%20'due%20to'%20COVID,from%20the%20death%20registration%20process.

reply

When it was said that a death was 'due to' Covid, it just that Covid was the underlying cause of death, or it was the one that started the train of events leading to death...

The report said that they were CHANGING to report COVID deaths like that.

That is why I highlighted the date of the report, i.e. Jan 2023. Which is significant...

"The deaths with COVID-19 metric has been used as the leading death indicator on the Gov.uk dashboard until 26 January 2023. "

So yeah, "LOL" indeed...

reply

The link just shows authorities being more rigorous. "The number of deaths within 28 days of COVID-19 will continue to be published as a subsidiary measure on the GOV.UK Dashboard to support users during this change by allowing comparison of both measures. We will also continue to publish this measure in the National COVID-19 and Flu surveillance report. All data will remain available for public use for transparency. You are reading too much into this. But then I suppose is all you have.

The implication that they are suppressing deaths from flu - likewise round the world, it would seem and for a reason you have yet to explain - is not to be found.

why I highlighted the date of the report, i.e. Jan 2023. Which is significant...
Yes because it corresponded with the emergence of the Omicron variant and increasing levels of immunity from vaccination and previous infection, resulting in protection from severe illness.

Unless you any real evidence, or reason, why governments suppressed flu infection rates worldwide, that's all from me.

reply

LOL πŸ˜‚ Okay, I have nothing further to add here. You are literally ignoring what that Government report says.

It does not say that they are going to be "more rigorous", it literally stated that until Jan '23 they did not use death certificates as a means of counting COVID deaths:-

"We started counting deaths with COVID-19 for rapid pandemic monitoring when there was a need to publish figures on a daily basis ... By using this measure, we were able to cut the reporting lag associated with death registrations from 11 days to 2-3 days. The deaths with COVID-19 metric has been used as the leading death indicator on the Gov.uk dashboard until 26 January 2023."


So I'm not "reading too much" into anything. I'm literally quoting to you the stated methodology - by their own admission - the UK Government used to count COVID deaths!

If you want to ignore that to back up whatever belief system you have, then as I've said before, that's fine by me but I can't go any further than to point out literally confirmed facts to you πŸ‘πŸΌ.

reply

it literally stated that until Jan '23 they did not use death certificates as a means of counting COVID deaths ... literally confirmed facts


It literally did not; and does not in your quote either. It mentions a 'reporting lag' and that is it. The link also says Death registrations are collated by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) and represent people who die from COVID-19, as decided by the clinician registering the death. This measure provides a less rapid but more accurate measure of the burden of the disease over time and has been published on the gov.uk dashboard since 2020.

So I'm not "reading too much" into anything.


Going by the above, it does not seem that you are reading at all.

AND oddly enough you still haven't any reason, why governments would suppress flu infection rates worldwide to bump up those for Covid.

Thank you for playing

reply

He provided a source and you still ignore and reject it in order to push your own narrative. Shocker

A perfect example of why you should stop nagging and begging others for sources or evidence.

reply

He provided a source and you still ignore and reject it


Er, how can I both ignore something and reject it, or come to that, reject it when I quote from it? I did not reject his source. I merely exampled how it does not say what he claimed it does. He also gave a link which only mentioned flu the once, so was rather irrelevant to the central point. This while apparently he cannot offer a good reason for this grand conspiracy of international data laundering. His only reason for propounding such an extravagant claim, that I can see, being that it 'sounds ridiculous'.

A perfect example of why you are too scared to offer sources or evidence.

reply

Rejected, ignored, take your pick, you're deflecting with semantics.

Bottom line is that you're not entitled to beg others for sources when you've demonstrated your hypocrisy.

Evasion, Deflection and Hypocrisy noted.

reply

you're not entitled to beg others for sources when you've demonstrated your hypocrisy.


Don't worry, I have long since given up on you ever providing anything along those lines.

Evasion, Deflection and Hypocrisy

As always please give an example for each. As always you won't.

reply

Wow.

You literally cannot read! Yes, it mentions a reporting lag and says that's why they used "Deaths with COVID" as the leading reporting metric until Jan '23!! πŸ˜‚

It seems almost insane that you could have looked at that and the direct quotes I have given, and highlighted, from that report without understanding that!

Thanks for playing indeed...

reply

"it literally stated that until Jan '23 they did not use death certificates as a means of counting COVID deaths .."

"Death registrations has been published on the gov.uk dashboard since 2020 are collated by the Office of National Statistics (ONS) and represent people who die from COVID-19,." (ie from the start)

A leading metric is simply the one they prefer.

QED

And even if we accept that something untoward went on here and worldwide, you still haven't given any reason why governments would bother to suppress flu infection rates worldwide in order to bump up those for Covid in the first place. One can only be pleased that you haven't dragged the Jews into it.

And this really is good bye.

reply

A leading metric is simply the one they prefer.

Exactly!

"We started counting deaths with COVID-19 for rapid pandemic monitoring when there was a need to publish figures on a daily basis to inform decisions about our pandemic response"...


So yes, going back to my very first point on this particular branch - There's no conspiracy, they used the metric that they preferred.

Apologies, I don't mean this in a rude way, but, as I've said, there's really no point in me continuing here as (despite your quote here!) you don't really seem to be able to understand what this means.

As, to your other "point", as I've said to you before I'm not interested in discussing conspiracies with you. If you want to do that, you'll have to do so with someone else...

reply

"The number of deaths within 28 days of COVID-19 will continue to be published as a subsidiary measure on the GOV.UK Dashboard to support users during this change by allowing comparison of both measures [ie death registrations AND deaths within 28 days]. We will also continue to publish this measure in the National COVID-19 and Flu surveillance report. All data will remain available for public use for transparency. "

reply

All they had to do was run the PCR Test cycles until it threw covid positives. All planned.

reply