by Kieron McFadden
The following article is from the Independent, which is owned by Russian oligarch Evgeny Lebedev (Tory Party donor), Saudi Sultan Sultan Muhammad Abuljadaye and Justin Byam Shaw chum of the Tory party Chairman .
Coronavirus UK: Further 42 hospital deaths in England as total doubles compared to last week
It provides a fantastic example of how the media play sly mind games that (a) try to scare the crap out of the reader yet (b) rely on the reader not reading the article properly.
As an exercise in coming to an understanding of how this works, compare the scary, misleading headline with the ACTUAL DATA in the article.
Take a look that the article HERE and compare what it actually says with what the headline suggests.
The 42 deaths were over a 2 month period. If you don’t read the article carefully you are likely to miss that point. That is roughly EIGHT WEEKS, which means an average of just over 5 deaths per week ACROSS THE UK.
There are about 1250 hospitals in the UK, which means one COVID 19 death for roughly every 260 hospitals!
Put in that missing context, it is not so scary is it? You cannot sell a scare that way. But it gets even more silly.
Then read carefully what the article says about the deaths.
ALL of them were of people between 45 and 100.
If you check the age distribution you will find that the vast majority were over 65.
Only THREE of them had no underlying conditions.
When they say “underlying conditions”, they mean things like cancer, lung disease etc that leave the person vulnerable to COVID and other bugs that are not killers on their own.
But they usually do not take into account other underlying conditions such as drug use, psych meds, severe vitamin D deficiencies, malnutrition, psychological factors and so forth. So even the three that had “no underlying conditions” may actually have had conditions that enabled a natively non-fatal bug to become fatal in PERHAPS one, two or all of those three cases.
8 were recorded as C19 deaths without even being tested. So we cannot be certain how many of these – IF ANY – were actually deaths where C19 was even present.
Of the remainder (31- roughly one death for every 400 UK hospitals) these, we assume, tested positive for COVID19.
But note another trick that throws in confusion and imprecision: the article sometimes refers to “Coronavirus” and sometimes, more specifically to C19. Coronavirus covers a family of viruses of which C19 is just one, So if you say a person tested positive for Coronavirus or died with Coronavirus that does not NECESSARILY mean C19, it could also mean the common cold or other viruses in that family.
It is worth bearing in mind that one thing that has characterised both the government’s and the media’s reporting of this “pandemic” to the people has been the vagueness or imprecision or inherent contradictions of the terms being used or the advice being given. This chaos of information creates confusions and uncertainty, which makes the job of the propagandist intent upon giving events a particular spin, a lot easier.
One could almost voice this as a natural law of propaganda: clarity of communication and meaning is the enemy of effective lying
This means that they tested positive within four weeks of their death. It means that C19 was allegedly present when they died or had recently been present. It does not NECESSARILY mean that C19 killed them, only that it was present.
All those people had underlying conditions. C19 was allegedly present but that is all we know from the stats. The article SUGGESTS that C19 at least contributed to the deaths of those people but the fact is we cannot tell. C19 may have been present but played no roll in their deaths, or played some role but we so not know to what degree.
Moreover, in the case of someone already dying from cancer, along comes C19 and finishes the poor devil off. So the government and media are fond of pointing out that C19 killed them because the patient would have lasted longer if it had not been there.
But equally, you could say that the cancer (or obesity, or asthma, or pneumonia and so forth) killed them because without the cancer the C19 virsus, which is not natively fatal, would not have killed them. So it depends on what spin you are putting on it and what you want to fix in the readers mind as to how you state it.
But the “positive” tests are not reliable and we cannot be sure that the 34 people who had “tested positive” were actually positive!
The problems with the PCR test are now legendary and there is no need to reiterate here what is by now broadly known and understood. But to summarise: the PCR test detects often MINUTE traces of remnants of Coronavirus (a family of viruses of which C19 is just one) DNA. It does not detect the presence of an actual virus. It is notoriously inaccurate, giving a very high rate of false positives. How high we assume that percentage of false positives is depends on which account we heed but the PM and Foreign Secretary have both admitted the test is only about 7% reliable.
If a test is only accurate in 7 out of every hundred done, it is in fact SEVEN TIMES less reliable than tossing a ruddy coin, which one would expect to give an accurate verdict roughly 50 out of every 100 times!
So basically, all we know from the article is that 42 people died (at a rate of one per week for every 250 hospitals) over the last EIGHT WEEKS. And we cannot be certain that the C19 virus actually killed any of even that tiny number!
So what the article does essentially is take some very NON SCARY figures that tell us there IS NOT a dangerous mass-killing epidemic going on, spins them and creates an illusion that purports to show how there IS a scary mass killing epidemic going on.
Then of course you look beyond the article at other stats, such as the overall chance of dying from C19 (even if you take the misleading figures as true!) being about the same as dying from seasonal flu and the amazing coincidence that what are alleged to be its symptoms are so similar to routine colds and flu, it is hard to tell the difference and you start to realise that we are being played on a monstrous scale.
And realise too that on the basis of a bug that allegedly (but probably doesn’t) kills 3 or 4 people per day across the entire country, whole areas are being shut down, businesses ruined and so on and so forth.
The very kindest thing you can say about a government that acts as if we are in the middle of the Black Death or some such thing is that it is very very easily panicked and its judgement is atrocious.
But that is the kindest thing you can say.
The reality is that this government and the media that acts as its propaganda arm is much more evil than that.
Personally, I want
- these criminals prosecuted and held to account.
- new laws to place restrictions upon those in government so that this sort of monstrously destructive deception NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.
- news laws that make the spinning of fake emergencies illegal and punishable by imprisonment on a charge of treason or similar.
- new laws that make it illegal for any politician or government official to knowingly lie or make false reports to the people
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.