Off Topic Coronavirus

I spoke to someone last night who works in a care home and stated that during the peak of deaths, while her home was locked down, 2 residents died, both at EoL (one with final stage Bowel CA). The GP’s from the home did not visit and no autopsy was performed however as the residents were both pyrexic near death, the primary cause of death was put as COVID.
Now of course this is anecdotal, but it fits in with what happened with my friends mum who also had co-morbidities, had a fall and died, again I’ve been told the primary cause of death was put as COVID (which they didn’t agree with).
Just wondering how many more this has happened to.

Staines R's said:

I spoke to someone last night who works in a care home and stated that during the peak of deaths, while her home was locked down, 2 residents died, both at EoL (one with final stage Bowel CA). The GP’s from the home did not visit and no autopsy was performed however as the residents were both pyrexic near death, the primary cause of death was put as COVID.
Now of course this is anecdotal, but it fits in with what happened with my friends mum who also had co-morbidities, had a fall and died, again I’ve been told the primary cause of death was put as COVID (which they didn’t agree with).
Just wondering how many more this has happened to.

Click to expand...

Lots of people making reference to lots of such incidences. What would be the motivation for this? It doesn’t make the government’s handling of the situation look any better. The corona virus bill directs the recordings of deaths accordingly. So what’s the reason? Why not record death as heart attack or injury following accident or whatever, keep corona numbers down and make the government look much better than they do? Butthuber?

Woodyhoopleson said:

Lots of people making reference to lots of such incidences. What would be the motivation for this? It doesn’t make the government’s handling of the situation look any better. The corona virus bill directs the recordings of deaths accordingly. So what’s the reason? Why not record death as heart attack or injury following accident or whatever, keep corona numbers down and make the government look much better than they do? Butthuber?

Click to expand...

I really don’t know and my personal opinion would be that it could possibly be down to laziness and an easy option for a GP to certify death over the phone and have it put down as ‘COVID’.
Others may say it’s a great conspiracy and that the deaths from the virus are being vastly inflated, so giving the government an excuse to curtail civil liberties and bring in a New World Order.......

Either way I do think these figures should be taken with a huge pinch of salt.

From my memory you can put down multiple causes on a death certificat. So my mother died of pneumonia but as a secondary cause was multiple sclerosis was added (which she had had for 40 years)
Now that was right, she died because the MS had rendered her ill and immobile and weak for so many years...so it was an underlying cause, but it was pneumonia that eventually attacked her frail body..

The new way of taking the figures is that if Covid is on the death certificate the patient must have a positive test in the previous 28 days. If this is followed, as it now is I believe, then that is OK. It is likely to have played a part in the death...weakening the patient to succumb. Yes they may have succumbed anyhowto their underlying disorder, but the doctor does not really know. It is not laziness but covering the bases

I can understand the ‘herd immunity’ thoughts for the younger groups (while the older groups, I assume, isolate); however how do you isolate the younger people from the elders in society (50+?). Many young people still live at home and where do they go while they are ill? How do they segregate themselves without passing on the virus to vulnerable (how do we decide who is vulnerable; take Mrs Steels as an example: fit, young yet having post complications that are affecting her quality of life fairly vigorously). How our society is constructed makes it very difficult to just say ‘let the younger in society catch it’ - some will inevitably die, is that an acceptable fallout?
I have said before that I don’t consider a mask a great protection in the big scheme of things (many don’t even wear them properly). However I am happy to wear mine for the benefit (however small) of others - that small percentage may help someone.
Similarly, I couldn’t give my support to a herd immunity approach towards younger people knowing that some will die and/or been left affected post-Covid. And, unfortunately, as has been mentioned our society seems to be so self-minded/belligerent to direction that I don’t see them following whatever sensible rules would be needed to not impact those that are vulnerable and cause other deaths.
We need to remain sensible, aware and careful to ourselves and those around us. Is that really so difficult to do in such a difficult time. Seventy years ago during wartime the sentiment was ‘carelessness costs life’, still applies today against a different foe.

qprbeth said:

From my memory you can put down multiple causes on a death certificat. So my mother died of pneumonia but as a secondary cause was multiple sclerosis was added (which she had had for 40 years)
Now that was right, she died because the MS had rendered her ill and immobile and weak for so many years...so it was an underlying cause, but it was pneumonia that eventually attacked her frail body..

The new way of taking the figures is that if Covid is on the death certificate the patient must have a positive test in the previous 28 days. If this is followed, as it now is I believe, then that is OK. It is likely to have played a part in the death...weakening the patient to succumb. Yes they may have succumbed anyhowto their underlying disorder, but the doctor does not really know. It is not laziness but covering the bases

Click to expand...

Interesting though, that the legislation was changed just before lock up began, just as covid was downgraded as no longer being a high consequence infectious disease.

So on the basis of the positive test in the last 28 days scenario, an asymptomatic person who dies from something completely unrelated, but has tested positive will have covid present on the death certificate?

Woodyhoopleson said:

Interesting though, that the legislation was changed just before lock up began, just as covid was downgraded as no longer being a high consequence infectious disease.

So on the basis of the positive test in the last 28 days scenario, an asymptomatic person who dies from something completely unrelated, but has tested positive will have covid present on the death certificate?

Click to expand...

I think that last scenario Woody is extremely unlikely and represents only a very very very few people.
Also the other fact is when the cause is obvious...like drowning or fatal car crash or suicide a secondary cause is not added.

From what I understand is that Covid is added if the patient dies with a positive test. So if someone is in hospital for some reason (heart attack, stroke, serious diabetes) , and contracts Covid...it is added.
Like wise if a Covid positive person comes in with added disorders and dies...it is present on death certificate.

Simply because you do not know if Covid has hastened the death,. It is standard practice wirth seasonal flu too

qprbeth said:

From my memory you can put down multiple causes on a death certificat. So my mother died of pneumonia but as a secondary cause was multiple sclerosis was added (which she had had for 40 years)
Now that was right, she died because the MS had rendered her ill and immobile and weak for so many years...so it was an underlying cause, but it was pneumonia that eventually attacked her frail body..

The new way of taking the figures is that if Covid is on the death certificate the patient must have a positive test in the previous 28 days. If this is followed, as it now is I believe, then that is OK. It is likely to have played a part in the death...weakening the patient to succumb. Yes they may have succumbed anyhowto their underlying disorder, but the doctor does not really know. It is not laziness but covering the bases

Click to expand...

Yes you are correct Beth, and more than one cause of death can be noted on the death certificate. However, to use pyrexia or Breathing difficulties as a reason to put COVID related symptoms in a death certificate, especially where there is absolutely no evidence to the fact, is completely misleading. And anecdotally, this has happened in the past

qprbeth said:

I think that last scenario Woody is extremely unlikely and represents only a very very very few people.
Also the other fact is when the cause is obvious...like drowning or fatal car crash or suicide a secondary cause is not added.

From what I understand is that Covid is added if the patient dies with a positive test. So if someone is in hospital for some reason (heart attack, stroke, serious diabetes) , and contracts Covid...it is added.
Like wise if a Covid positive person comes in with added disorders and dies...it is present on death certificate.

Simply because you do not know if Covid has hastened the death,. It is standard practice wirth seasonal flu too

Click to expand...

So what your saying is that many die WITH COVID, but not FROM COVID ?

If I’m reading you right then surely you’d agree, the figures we have and are fed daily are completely meaningless

I would like to explain how the PCR test is working best explained through an analogy.

Imagine you are playing hide & seek with 5 children. Normaly you would look out for any of those 5 children no matter the race, age or any family bondages.

The PCR test works differently.

Imagine you are playing hide & seek with the same 5 children but this time you are wearing glasses and those glasses are designed to only look for a particular child - what would you find (or not) ?

You may find this particular child (positve) or you don´t find it (negative). Since those glasses are not 100% correct (only 98%) it will also find any other of the children but still believing that it is supposed to be this particular child (false positive).

In Germany they have already canceled carneval in several cities - 5 months ahead of that. Does this mean we have to stop all social activities, stay at home for work (if possible), letting children have to wear masks which will do a lof of harm to them - just because we still do not want to believe we have been cheated ?

I see the coronavirus has tested positive for Neil Warnock...

I should have added to my example that those glasses (PCR) do not prove that this child (virus) was causing any problem it only proves to be there (found) - nothing else. Imagine how the PCR test is being performed it is just like throwing the dice.

Butthuber said:

Australians must know the truth - this virus is

You must log in or register to see media

The greatest hoax in history ... and that was just start of much more to come.

Click to expand...

Butthuber said:

Australians must know the truth - this virus is not a pandemic': Alan Jones

You must log in or register to see media

The greatest hoax in history ... and that was just start of much more to come.

Click to expand...

Ahh yes..

Mahatma ghandi..
Martin Luther King..
Confucious..

Alan Jones.

Cases increasing in France and I am hearing from a few places that we are heading back into lock down this weekend.

daverangers said:

Cases increasing in France and I am hearing from a few places that we are heading back into lock down this weekend.

Click to expand...

Nah they’ll announce it to come in on Tuesday and give us a Saturday night in the pub. We deserve it.

West WindsR said:

Nah they’ll announce it to come in on Tuesday and give us a Saturday night in the pub. We deserve it.

Click to expand...

Since when did you live in France ?

daverangers said:

Cases increasing in France and I am hearing from a few places that we are heading back into lock down this weekend.

Click to expand...

Nothing to worry about though.

My fears about reopening schools seems to becoming more apparant. Was it Witty who said that we may have to close something to reopen them? Obviously when people like Gove and Hancock said that that it would be perfectly safe to do so, they were basing it on the use of our world beating test and trace system. We have barely had a functioning system since it was introduced.