We’re republishing a post from our in-house doctor, formerly a senior medic in the NHS, on the unreliability of official figures on ‘Covid inpatients’ . This was first published in July and only now has the mainstream media finally cottoned on to the fact that the NHS’s Covid inpatient figures are unreliable. Since we published this, there have been at least three updates to the ‘primary diagnosis schedule’, all showing a consistent overstatement of 25%.
On Thursdays, the NHS release the weekly summary data in relation to Covid patients. Normally this is a more granular version of the daily summaries – it has some hospital level detail and figures on non-Covid workload for comparison. Usually interesting but not especially informative.
Yesterday was an exception. Placed down at the bottom of the page, almost like a footnote, was a “Primary Diagnosis” Supplement. Graph One shows the information contained in that spreadsheet. I find it astonishing. In essence, it shows that since June 18th, the NHS has known its daily figures in relation to ‘Covid inpatients’ were unreliable at best and deliberately untrue at worst.
The Yellow bars are what the NHS has been informing the nation were Covid inpatients. The Blue bars are the numbers of inpatients actually suffering from Covid symptoms – the difference between the two are patients in hospital who tested positive for Covid but were being treated for something different – where Covid was effectively an incidental finding but not clinically relevant.
For example, on July 27th, the total number of beds occupied by Covid patients was reported as 5,021. However, until today, we were not permitted to know that only 3,855 of those were actually admitted with Covid as the primary diagnosis. There has been a fairly consistent overestimate of the true number by about 25% running back to mid June – figures before that date are ‘not available’.
Why does this matter?
Well in one way it doesn’t matter very much. Whether the burden of Covid inpatients is 5% of the available beds or 3.5%, isn’t massively significant – it’s still a relatively small proportion. NHS managers are already arguing that even patients with Covid being treated for another condition still need isolation procedures and present an extra burden on the system. They may argue that the NHS is still under strain from staff absences, stress levels and the waiting list backlog – so it doesn’t really matter if the published figures are somewhat inaccurate.
But it matters hugely.
Firstly, it clearly shows that the NHS has been exaggerating the burden of Covid on hospitals by 25% since at least the June 18th and almost certainly for longer. All the senior NHS leaders and politicians quoting the number of Covid inpatients for the last six weeks have been painting a seriously exaggerated picture, significantly worse than the true position. Were they in ignorance about the true numbers, or were they deliberately misleading the public?
The question also arises whether Government ministers have been given the same inaccurate information, or whether they too knew the information was exaggerated. This goes to the heart of how important decisions are made in the U.K. If ministers are being provided with incorrect information, they will make poor decisions. Have the NHS been deliberately ‘filtering’ information passed to ministers with the intention of influencing important decisions and maintaining restrictions on the public?
On the other hand, if the decision-makers were aware that the published figures were false and that the true picture is significantly better, why have they been so slow to open up and so ready to talk up the threat? Hospital inpatient numbers and the burden on ‘our NHS’ have been used for months to justify maintaining societal restrictions, vaccine passports, excessive and expensive testing for foreign travel and an unprecedented curtailment of civil liberties in the U.K. Have ministers been aware all this time, that the true picture was far less of a ‘threat’ than they have publicly stated? I think the public need answers to these questions from our elected representatives – and directly honest ones rather than the usual obfuscation and circumlocution.
On July 12th, Mark Harper MP asked Sajid Javid in the House of Commons whether the information being published about Covid inpatients was accurate. The question was captured on the Parliamentary TV channel. Javid replied to the effect that the information may not be strictly accurate and he had asked for clarification from the Department of Health on these points. If these new figures are true, we now know the extent of the inaccuracy.
Of course, many readers will have long questioned the validity of the official data. I myself have found it difficult to reconcile the admissions from the community numbers, compared with the monthly discharge figures set against the ever-increasing numbers of ‘Covid inpatients’. The figures just didn’t make sense – now I know why.
In previous posts, I have preferred to look at daily admissions from the community, rather than the figures for patients diagnosed in hospital, based on my suspicion that the data was manipulated. As readers will know, the number of positive tests in the community has been falling for the last week. Graph Two shows daily admissions to hospitals from the community on the blue bars and the three-day rolling average on the orange line.
The rate of admissions seems to be levelling off – readers should remember that admissions usually lag positive community tests by 10 days or so. This is an early finding and may well prove to be a false indicator, but at the moment it is changing consistently with falling test numbers. The next week will be important in assessing whether admissions will mirror tests and start to fall. It is entirely reasonable for readers to question whether these figures are also exaggerated – I wonder that myself. Nevertheless, it is the trend rather than the absolute value that is the important issue, so I do think this dataset has utility. Fewer positive tests in the community should filter through to fewer positive tests on admission – even for patients admitted for other primary diagnoses, so it should be a fair reflection of the amount of virus there is prevalent in the U.K.
Supporting this finding is Graph Three. showing the fall in Admissions in relation to positive tests – in February, about 10% of people testing positive ended up in hospital. Now only 2% do – in essence, Graph Three shows that the risk of someone ending up in hospital with Covid has fallen by 80% from the peak number in February.
As with in-hospital infection rates, the NHS has once again been caught out concealing important information from the public. I find that truly shocking, but not surprising – in some ways I’m actually more surprised they have admitted it!
My suspicion is that the new health secretary and the newly appointed CEO of the NHS have been keen to get the true figures in the public domain at the start of their tenure, knowing that it would come out eventually. In business, this is called ‘kitchen sinking’ – where a new CEO gets all the bad news out early with the hope of blaming one’s predecessor and establishing a fresh start.
Nevertheless, Amanda Pritchard, appointed this week as the successor to Simon Stevens, has been the Chief Operating Officer of the NHS for nearly two years – is it possible that she has been unaware of the deception until very recently and suddenly undergone a Damascene conversion to the cause of transparency?
What this issue really goes to however is the factor at the heart of any doctor-patient interaction. The concept of Trust. I can’t overstate how important trust is in clinical medicine. The managers of the NHS expect clinicians to practice a ‘duty of candour’ when interacting with the public. It seems they don’t consider themselves to be under the same obligation. A curious parallel with recent ‘double standards’ from our politicians.
NHS managers at the highest level have repeatedly been caught out concealing important information or distorting published data. They did it with in-hospital infection rates, with reported death figures and now with hospital inpatient numbers. Viewed in a generous light this could be attributed to serial incompetence rather than deliberate deception. However, there is a pattern of behaviour here: concealment, denial, cover-up; trashing and vilification of people questioning the official narrative; followed by reluctant forced admission, spurious post hoc justification, dismissal of criticism and an appeal to the public to trust the NHS.
Our political and health care leaders may be about to discover that trust is a fragile commodity – and it’s running out fast.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Formally a senior medic … or formerly?
Grammar police, well spotted.
I know, right? Even ‘formerly’ leaves things open to interpretation: was he perhaps sacked for malpractice?
Still, we have known this from the beginning: it’s the old ‘with’ and ‘of’ cobblers; just framed differently.
Probably formerly, it’s formerly with the nurse at our anti-lockdown prayer group.
They are all evil liars. Who knew?
And they are becoming more brazen every day. They are becoming more brazen in their lies and manipulations because they KNOW they can get away with this. They know this for several reasons:
1) Everyone in the bureaucracies is of the same mind.
2) They know no “watchdog” news organizations are going to expose their lies – that there will be no repercussions for their actions.
3) The public – “we the people” – are now, for the most part, backing their prescriptions and policies/mandates.
4) The Courts are on their side.
5) Those who do call them out are relegated to fringe alternative media sties due to the success of ever-expanding censorship operations.
When you have achieved absolute power, you (not surprisingly) act accordingly .. And it’s more than just COVID policies.
6) The lunatics have taken over the asylum.
Good spot by the ‘in-house doctor’ – worthy of Clare Craig and other statistics luminaries.
However, let’s be honest, it’s not a surprise is it?
First we saw the NHS change the rules on how many doctors could certify death. Then we saw death certification being done over the phone by care home supervisors…….’if in doubt, call it C-19’.
Then there was the ‘death within 28-days of a positive 40-cycle PCR-test.
The last summer, just as people stopped dying of C-19, we saw the arrival of the terms ‘cases’ and ‘infections’. The same PCR-test was used to create a ‘casedemic’, where there was absolutely NO illness, but lockdowns were still mandated.
Then came the jabs, and more statistical games began, as the government kept on moving the goal-posts to avoid having to justify breaking promises and return freedoms.
Now we know that the jabs don’t really work. Now some of us fear they actually may any infection worse.
Now they want to jab kids and have twisted the law and medical ethics completely out of shape, and are playing games about ‘vaccine passports’.
So these statistical games are not in any way a surprise.
‘Vaccine passports’ already exist by the way. The NHS Covid Pass is run by NHS Digital, and it has been passing individuals’ data to their contracted partners who are uploading it onto their chosen platform……..there is no question that ‘vaccine passports’ will become a reality. The only question is whether you accept the jab.
p.s.
An example of statistical fiddling can be found in some figures from Northern Ireland.
Just before Christmas last year, it was reported that 1,403 people in N.I. had succumbed to C-19 in 2020 up to November. In fact, the number of deaths genuinely caused by C-19 was 114…….that’s not even 10%.
The NHS has consistently wilfully exaggerated the effect and threat of C-19.
Why?
The NHS has consistently wilfully exaggerated the effect and threat of C-19. Why?
Because the government wants it to do so in order to create more fear and panic, so that people will lose all sense and clamour for the Covid-19 death shots.
The more that the naive get themselves vaxxed-up, the better pleased will be the globalist depopulation clique. This clique controls most governments, including especially the heavily corrupted Five Eyes countries.
Yes, but it is a very strange logic.
Why would governments want to ‘de-populate’ their countries when large populations mean more economic activity.
Further, the most jab-resistant tend to be non-native, i.e. non-white sectors of society. What would they wish to alter the racial balance of a country in a radical way, rather than let things mix over generations?
I had read about Gates & co. wanting the jab the world, but I have never understood why.
It’s not about jabbing the world, it’s about introducing centralized digital and fine-grained permissions management systems – checking who was jabbed and granting permissions based on that is just the first (and fairly innocent) use case of this platform. At the same time it gives a great excuse for the whole platform to be built and put into operation (keyword ID2020).
As for Gates personally, I believe the only thing that ultrarich and powerful people long for is a fountain of youth and delaying one’s inevitable demise. Some of the drugs that are now being tested on the entire world’s population carry a promise for fulfilling such wishes of the ultrarich, but were not allowed for human use in the past decades – so time is kinda running out. Even when you are ultrarich, it’s difficult to do experimentation on human subjects under normal circumstances. Hence, you have to change the circumstances to appear no longer normal, and then perhaps a big breakthrough will finally allow you to put your hoarded money to good personal use.
I think this is just Bill Gates MO. It’s like putting Microsoft free into every PC, genius. This time round it’s humans and vaccines, get everyone on the planet jabbed, and onto a vaccine passport… We are all his little walking computers, ready to be micro chipped.
Credit to Yeadon he called it.
There is no need to micro chip anyone, the microchip is already built in into your phone and people carry those devices with them. For now it’s voluntary, but soon will become obligatory because all the access permissions will be stored on the phone. Banking is already next to impossible without a phone, and soon your ID will be stored on it as well. Basically the phone becomes your ankle monitor.
Because 1 billion people will use up finite resources far more slowly than 7 billion. The elite will still have lives of luxury and retain their power – and they’ll still be enough people around to do the jobs that machines can’t.
Digital passports will lead to digital currency and then a social credit system – everyone will be put on UBI. However, it’s wishful thinking to believe that the elite will happily pay 7 billion people to sit around watching Netflix indefinitely, whilst simultaneously using up resources. The next step is depopulation – probably via vastly reduced fertility rates. Now, I wonder what might cause that to happen?
The US constitutes ~5% of the world’s population, but consumes ~25% of the resources. The other western countries are close in terms of disproportionate resource use.
Only ~5% of the population has be disappeared or squalified to save ~25% of resources.
Interesting observation – the Deagel predictions had the USA down to a population of 99 million by 2025 (the UK down to 14 million, and 10s of millions removed from the current populations of Germany, France, Spain, Italy, while China, Russia are pretty much the same and India with an increase). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jY4Wahyo5n0
Food for thought in the context of Gates wanting everyone jabbed.
They won’t stop at 5%. This is the chance of a lifetime, likely they’ll go for 95% as much more in keeping with the Georgia Guidestones.
“…probably via vastly reduced fertility rates.”
However, do the sums and anything but total sterility (destroying the human world) will not reduce the population. Have a look at the population of China during the one-child policy.
The population is set to level off naturally in a generation or so, but the guys who want it down to 1 billion can only possibly achieve it by mass murder.
Total sterility in the mass of the population in Western countries will assuredly reduce population numbers, though. And as Arthur Mo has pointed out, maybe that is the aim in terms of reducing the consumption of resources in a worldwide context?
And, of course, if ADE strikes hard, the number of deaths in the next few years will be catastrophic!
It will be mass murder and the method of bringing it about should be clear to us all by now. It is of course the Covid “vaccines”, which would be better described as bioweapons. Some of the injected die quickly, but most will succumb over the coming months and next few years so as to set in place UN Agenda 2030 for sustainable development. Sustainable development being UN code for depopulation.
This explains the manic push to inject us all with their various toxic agents. A large group of non-injected people, who were stubbornly refusing to die, would be a real danger to the poisoners, making it all too obvious where the real problems lie. So by hook or by crook they intend to get their needles into all of us over the coming months. Resistance has never been so vital.
Because governments don’t want that. The people who currently don’t govern just want others to believe in it.
There is no single explanation for the behaviour of different groups. Different groups will have different motives for taking part, and the motives of one group may be mutually exclusive with another group. One can project / infer all sorts of motive ‘behind it all’ – depopulation, slavery, whatever, but that all leads nowhere. It is all plausibly deniable.
The ultimate common factor is simple financial fraud – that is something that can be demonstrated (every deviation from past practice leads in one direction) – and fraud negates all the legal contracts, all the self-created immunity, etc.
Expose the fraud – but how?
Fraud is one of the mechanisms of bringing about the Covid event. There are many other ways in which this long planned event is being engineered. These mechanisms though, are not the drivers of the Covid event. The Covid raison d’être is depopulation and massive depopulation at that. Sustainable development is UN code for depopulation and is the main driver of its Agenda 2030.
The elites don’t need any more economic activity. They just want to own everything and not share anything with the likes of us. They see their new Great Reset world as their play park. It will be off limits to all but the necessary worker drones, while other worker drones will be confined to their dormitory towns.
The lucky few thousand elites will be able to live quite well with around half a billion unpaid drones to service their every need. They don’t need another seven billion of us getting in their way and wrecking the joint.
I think you really know why Gates wants to jab the world. He’s got more than seven billion of us to get rid of and the jabs are of course really depopulation bioweapons. But as I said before I think you knew that already.
The evidence that these jabs would make infections worse has long been known. Just think antibiotic resistant bacterial strains….
Why does drug resistance readily evolve but vaccine resistance does not? – PMC
Us pro-lifers have known for a long time that there’s been dodgy stuff going on with medics following a political agenda. Seems to me a classic case of “when they came for… I did nothing because I wasn’t…. and by the time they came for me, there was no one left to do anything.!
“…trust is a fragile commodity – and it’s running out fast.”
I think this is an understatement of the problem in both political and health spheres (which, of course, are now fatally intertwined).
Trust – although never absolute – is, indeed, a critical component of society, and its undermining sets off an unpredictable downward spiral. I reckon that it was booted out of the window some time ago as a precious asset – and thus the past tense is more appropriate.
This article pins down one important aspect of trust – the reliability of data. Most here have known for 18 months that this was fundamental – and, essentially, is what has set us off on this trail.
Even the revisions pointed to here get nowhere near bottoming the crucial flaws in the foundation of the narrative. My suspicion is that this is an understatement of the misrepresentation even now.
You could include science too. This article by Ioannidis if you haven’t seen it, is a good read on the subject…
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/pandemic-science
I’ve reached the conclusion that if there is “data,” said data is manipulated for a nefarious purpose/agenda. Not just medical or scientific data either. For example, data about the economy and inflation is also manipulated and has been for decades. For years, conventional wisdom among the establishment was/is that inflation is low and/or contained. Indeed, that it was too low. Long ago, the way inflation was calculated was changed. This was done to protect the “printing press” and allow the State to print as much money as they needed.
For years, we were told that the economy was “robust” and great when it really wasn’t. The main “data” that supported the faux narrative was/is the ever-rising stock markets (which are almost certainly rigged and manipulated to ensure this economic indicator is always “bullish.”).
Another example: “Wars” are no longer “wars.” They are now “Interventions.” Still, the way casualties are counted in these interventions is manipulated or pretty much not reported. Just recently there was a furor in the U.S. and the world when a drone attack resulted in the deaths of 10 Afghani innocent civilians, including seven children. Well, this was not the first time U.S. drone strikes had killed large numbers of innocent civilians or citizens. It was just the first time in ages such an attack actually got reported. The “data” on these previous strikes had been manipulated or not reported.
… The absence of a real “watchdog” press has allowed all of the above to occur. The more brazen censorship programs have also helped ensure this data manipulation continues, which it will. It HAS to if the Status Quo is going to be preserved.
As always, it’s not what’s reported that matters. It’s what NOT reported.
Trust and money!
We have lost trust and there is a lot of money being thrown around. Not a great combination.
I know that the ATL article is about Covid admissions and not deaths but it inspired me to pose this question: once a patient admitted for non-Covid reasons is found to be ‘Covid positive’ and is transferred to a Covid unit what is their subsequent treatment protocol?
The reason I ask this is that several years ago my able-bodied and able-minded mother went into hospital with sepsis infection. Her initial emergency treatment worked well and she was transferred to a general ward for what was intended to be a brief rehabilitation period prior to coming home. But on that ward she was – best description – mistreated, neglected and overdosed on morphine (and possibly midazolam, who knows) resulting in several recurrent bouts of pneumonia and UTIs and damage to her cognitive functions, akin to dementia. For in-house logistical reasons she was transferred to a third ward where it became apparent to us that the nursing staff believed that they were dealing with an elderly ‘bed blocker’ who had been admitted to hospital because of dementia.
I also recall reading about a world famous athlete’s father who was admitted to hospital in early 2020 with heart problems, was found to be asymptomatic ‘Covid positive’, was immediately transferred to a Covid ward where he was given no treatment whatsoever for the heart condition which prompted his hospital admission, and subsequently died from heart failure.
It seems to me that if, as is likely, such cases are the tip of the iceberg it wouldn’t be of surprise to me if a high proportion of Covid deaths are avoidable and are actually the result of failure to treat the original medical complaint because of the obsession with Covid in the NHS. I can’t believe that each specialist unit e.g. cardiology, neurology etc has an attached Covid unit where patients are treated equally for their original ailment and for Covid, which may or may not be symptomatic. These are the sort of questions that should be asked of the NHS.
B.C (Before Covid), I remember what seemed to be increasing news articles about local hospitals being taken into special measures and cover up claims seemed to be piling up.
Regardless of whether you’re in hospital or not, you don’t get any treatment for covid in this country until you’re bad enough to be bunged onto a ventilator and/or into ICU. There is no TREATMENT for covid provided at all in the UK.
I agree. It seems that ‘Covid’ patients with any kind of respiratory distress are by default placed on ventilators – which are probably being operated and monitored by inappropriately trained staff. It seems to me that ‘Covid’ patients who haven’t quite reached the point where the medical staff feel justified in placing them on a ventilator, or who are asymptomatic, seem to be left in a bed with a nasal oxygen canula at best but are not treated at all for their original medical condition, Covid related or otherwise. When their condition deteriorates for whatever reason….ventilator job. Bingo…more ‘Covid’ deaths.
Excellent article. As the author emphasizes, this is the bottom-line and key question: Can and should the public trust official statements and statistics? Are these people really credible? Are they manipulating data to serve some nefarious agenda? Are they omitting important details and facts?
It’s obvious they are, and probably have been since this pandemic began. But most people continue to trust these people and organizations.
This also shows that the mainstream press – and its “investigative reporters” – are an important (and enthusiastic) element of this conspiracy to conceal the truth.
Cases falling. So when is the booster roll out beginning
They conceal health care, why not information…
As I already wrote in the past: If they openly admit 25%, chances are that the acual ‘error’ is much larger than that. I mean We admit that we’ve been lying to you. But only a fourth of what we claimed has been untrue? WTF?
A couple of extra considerations: John Dee hints (pending release of stats) that many of the “75%” are A&E presenters wanting diagnosis who are sent home, but are still coded as “COVID admissions.”
And there are indicators in the US that many actual admissions are mild or asymptomatic cases who are kept under observation because of risk factors, but are not actually requiring hospital intervention.
Clearly, the stats are intended to make one think of hospitals full of people fighting for their breath, but that is to an unknown extent not the case.
Which is why they never publish any figures for discharges.
Just wondering if Will or this “in-house doctor” are ever going to give their thoughts on this phenomenon of “Covid deaths” being 10-15 times higher this August/September (with 80%-90% “vaxxed”) than they were last August/September, when no-one was “vaxxed”.
Table below: numbers are death by date of death.
Source: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths
No, they won’t do that.
And ‘NHS staff absences’ are primarily due to exaggerated covid test results.
A self inflicted injury on the NHS by the NHS that expects us, the great British public, to subordinate our lives to its stupidy and deception.
The x axis of graph 3 seems to go from right to left, which is incorrect.
It’s actually worse, I think. They’re exaggerating by 30%, not 25%. The excess of 1,166 is relative to the correct amount, 3,855 not the higher false amount. So, it’s a 30% exaggeration. Sneaky.
Let us not forget that, even with acute “covid” symptoms, the symptoms exactly resemble acute influenza symptoms.
PCR test run at above 40 cycles has a 97% false positive rate.
Therefore, the on July 27th, those patients who were actually admitted with” Covid” as the primary diagnosis, could well have been 115 in actual covid cases and 3740 case of influenza.
“When a doctor does go wrong he is the first of criminals.”
Sherlock Holmes
And if you go chasing rabbits, and you know you’re going to fall
Update – September 18th
https://bakerstreetrising.home.blog/2021/02/15/covax-through-the-looking-glass-part-4/
The NHS, kills more people every month of every year than COVID ever will. 750 avoidable deaths a week in NHS, yes you read right 750.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jul/14/avoidable-deaths-nhs-hospitals-study