Viruses – lies – damned lies – statistics

People are being told to rush to be tested.  Why?  The test is admitted to be faulty by doctors and scientists as giving false positives.  If the test is positive the unfortunate  patient so tested will be subjected to ‘assistance’.  That ‘assistance’ comes in the form of anti-viral drugs which are admitted by their makers to have serious side effects – for ‘side effects’ read effects.  If the patient is old and ill, they could be the last thing he or she experiences.

If the anti-virals don’t kill you, why not have a go at a bit of intubation?  That is the so-named ventilators covered widely in the media.  Do you know how many people survive intubation at the current time?  You might be a little shocked to hear that only 30% survive.  Nearly 70% die while undergoing intubation, as their lungs collapse.  Some ‘treatment’ with the same odds of survival as a WW1 infantry assault during the Battle Of the Somme.

All these deaths are reported in the media as ‘Coronavirus’ victims.  No wonder Boris is trying his hardest to stop people from being tested, while saying otherwise – as politicians have to do.  The WHO and the medical authorities are clearly more powerful than any Prime Minister of Great Britain and NI, and more people are going to be tested.  Don’t fall for it, with all the soft soap about being tested being reassuring.

Testing is the start of the process.  They have signalled via big companies like Pandora and Virgin that the lockdown will last until the middle of May (most probably) and so there is plenty of time to ventilate a few thousand more ‘recruits’.

As for the number of CV deaths, have any post mortems been carried out?  Thought not.  Better to bury mistakes.

The hunt for more recruits is accelerating –

tapnewswire.com/2020/04/uk-govt-set-to-release-app-that-tracks-contacts-of-coronavirus-patients/

How China's using surveillance to fight coronavirus

Coronavirus: How China’s using surveillance to tackle outbreak

The coronavirus pandemic may have emerged in China, but the country now has fewer cases than the US, Italy and Spain.

The Chinese government has used tools such as phone tracking to control the outbreak. Other countries are starting to look at similar technological solutions.

But how does China’s controversial surveillance system work and can state intervention on this scale be justified?

Reporter: Joe Tidy

Anger at lack of answers as Government fails to ramp up virus testing (TAP – ahem)

By Daniel Capurro,
Front Bench Editor
It can’t be news to many people that the best way to bring the Covid-19 crisis under control is testing. Yet on Wednesday, the Government spent another uncomfortable day failing to explain why testing levels are so low – just 2,000 NHS staff have been tested – or how it plans to lift them.

– What went wrong –

Answers to the former are available, despite the silence from ministers. There is a shortage of essential chemicals and equipment, created in part by Britain’s late decision to switch away from a herd immunity strategy, with a sole focus on boosting critical care capacity, which left it at the back of the queue for orders.

There also appears to be a cultural and structural issue. The point of comparison has become Germany, which is performing half a million or more tests a week.

But as Justin Huggler and Bill Gardner explain, Germany’s healthcare system is far less centralised and has a much stronger private sector. Combined with a willingness to allow multiple approaches to testing it has allowed hundreds of labs to take part. The UK, by contrast, is highly prescriptive and focused on building massive testing hubs from scratch.

But the “why” matters only in as much as it helps provide answers for how to fix the problem. An inability to test is disastrous for efforts to fight the virus. It means the Government cannot keep track of where the virus is or how fast it is spreading.

Matt Hancock, the Health Secretary who is returning from self-isolation today, has announced that he has a “five-point plan” to fix the problem. Laura Donnelly and Gordon Rayner have the rather thin details.

– Communication breakdown –

Yet the other major problem here comes from the Government’s public handling of the problem. It has only been a few days since questions over the lack of testing have really ramped up, and clearly efforts to fix it cannot be instantaneous.

However, ministers are losing the communication battle, with patience fraying even among seasoned journalists, as Michael Deacon makes clear. And that is just as serious as a lack of testing. Nobody expects miracles, but ministers can’t treat this like a normal cock-up and obfuscate until something more interesting comes along.

The Government is asking extraordinary things of the general public, and for the most part they are complying. The importance of the lockdown can be seen in a new study from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical medicine which shows that it may be pushing the replication rate of the virus into decline.

– Once you’ve lost it, you can’t get it back –

But that compliance is built on trust and if it starts to fray, particularly later in the year when the risk of a second wave of the virus rises, the UK could be in serious trouble.

Already, there are signs of problems. Car journeys have ticked up significantly in recent days, with the suspicion being that many self-employed people are returning to work because the months-long delay in financial assistance from the Government is leaving them without money.

In Italy, there are already signs that financial hardship is causing deep frustration with lockdown measures.

The Government’s scientific advisers fully expect that compliance with the lockdown will fray over time, particularly as the weather improves. But that only makes it more important for the Government not to give people any extra reason to break the rules.

It’s well established that in times of crisis, trust in the Government is essential to making sure that citizens do what is needed of them, and that trust is created by honesty. That means that ministers need to start giving straight answers, even if they are embarrassing or uncomfortable.

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.