You fail to admit that many of the deaths attributed to covid-19 are really down to covid-19

Now you are just talking nonsense. If you have no argument then please refrain from commenting.

Why would such an unreliable testing system (PCR) be permitted to continue? I don’t know, but it’s not to do with science.

Anyone unsure what’s the extent of excess deaths in autumn/winter arising from SARS-CoV-2 should read this by Jonathan Engler. Spoiler: there aren’t any.

Surely that’s impossible if we’re on the midst of a 2nd wave of a respiratory virus pandemic?

Quite. You’re being lied to.

Musings on mortality data.

Jonathan Engler thread
https://twitter.com/jengleruk/status/1338136702708293636

Then compare all-causes mortality in the elderly (the most vulnerable) in England, France & Sweden. Should be simple to spot where lockdowns, masks & other restrictions were imposed, surely, if they were effective? Especially given these had different timings & intensities across the 3 countries?

Or you might decide that, cleaned of the contaminating label of “covid19 deaths” (which you don’t need in order to see prominent signals, ie in spring), you start to see what I’ve been arguing for months: that the 2nd wave is a contrivance arising from misuse of a technique prone to cross contamination related false positives. That the claims of large numbers of covid19 deaths are mostly misattributions. Why would such an unreliable testing system (PCR) be permitted to continue?

I don’t know, but it’s not to do with science.

Yardley Yeadon
https://twitter.com/jengleruk/status/1338136702708293636

Why would such an unreliable testing system (PCR) be permitted to continue? I don’t know, but it’s not to do with science.

Of course, the net result of the current mass testing programme is a gross exaggeration of the presence of covid-19 as both 'cases' the living and 'causes' in the recent dead. I think everyone here would agree. Overall, it is an "unreliable testing system" as you say.

As Splatty has said, it is the mass testing of an asymptomatic population that is mostly at fault. Also, as positive results do not necessarily reflect infections or infectiousness, the use of the results is incorrect. The whole policy is wrong.

Even if the policy were right, the implementation is not properly quality controlled. There is a huge difference in quality of testing according to which test labs do it. See here. The private labs are showing ridiculously high positive results - about 8x too many. NHS labs in the summer showed up to 1.7x too many. Cambridge University labs recently showed 1.13x too many.

If proper quality control were used, the 'cases' would be 1/7th of what they currently are - even if we were to accept the bad policy (which we don't, of course!)

"I will not live in fear of a virus!"

Let’s listen closely to this right honourable member, who expresses so well the responses of many of us, me included, to what is happening to this nation.

"I will not live in fear of a virus!"
Tory rebel Sir Charles Walker gave a passionate speech in the House of Commons against Covid restrictions in England.
https://youtu.be/y6FRcufY13c

What a good speech this is. He expresses so clearly what is motivating me & driving my emotions & actions. What is happening has no longer anything to do with a virus, or with protecting anyone. To pretend it is, is either wilful blindness or complacency beyond measure.

Comparisons with Sweden have been politicised, for reasons which are obvious & is one of the many malign products of the PsyOps our taxes pay for, in order to shape our reactions to topics they’d prefer us not to think about.

See this graph (below): it’s from a group of Danish epidemiologists in Stockholm & shows all-causes mortality in those aged 85+ in France, Sweden & England. I chose this cohort as that most likely to perish with an encounter with a severe, acute respiratory virus.

All-causes means a ‘body count’ and there’s nothing about cause here. In other words, it can’t be bent.

Looking at these graphs, there’s no sign of where lockdowns were imposed in spring. No hint of when masks were made mandatory in shops or indeed everywhere. No changes where it was made illegal to mix with others. No benefit of reimposing an autumn lockdown.

Yet all countries show a prominent spring peak, showing beyond question they were intensely infected. Each has some degree of what I call a ‘secondary ripple’ in autumn/winter.

As we know, Sweden chose not to use the law to coerce its population. I can’t point to any portions of the timelines to indicate the benefits of this having happened in England or France. Yet the costs to our public health, our economy, our social sphere, our politics & the rule of law, our historic freedoms of association, movement, free speech, protest have all been trampled underfoot.

As the MP says so well, this is all for a virus of not particularly remarkable lethality, with median age at death being slightly older at 82.7 years than is normal life expectancy for that cohort.

And will this unwind when the virus has completed its passage through the population? Since it clearly has already done so, the answer seems clear.

That so few are interested in the data as close to source as it’s possible to get causes despondency in me. Merely asking questions can bring criticism rather than answers.

Thread: Yardley Yeadon
https://twitter.com/MichaelYeadon3/status/1338242634041667586

Well I for one am interested in the data so thank you.
😀