"Facts about COVID-19": Swiss Propaganda Research Article

[JES]

If Professor John Oxford thinks coronavirus is nothing more serious than seasonal flu, he would need to explain:

• Why in seasonal winter influenza epidemics, hospitals around the world are not overrun with very sick patients, whereas at present it is hell in many hospital ICUs, with the medical staff absolutely exhausted, physically and emotionally, by the sheer volume of sick patients and deaths. And it is going to get a lot worse over the coming weeks.

• Why in Italy over 100 doctors and nurses have died of coronavirus so far while they were trying to help sick and dying coronavirus patients. In the UK there have been 5 medical staff deaths so far. I don't think you get medics dying while treating influenza patients.

Yeah, it looks to me like someone sitting in their ivory tower playing with numbers and statistics, a bit like the PACE authors did. Would be nice to have one of these people visit a hospital in Bergamo or New York and see if they'd reassess their "model". Even the Nordic countries are all having problems with converting enough intensive care places for the COVID-19 patients. The number of intensive care beds over here has been tripled in preparation for this epidemic and it looks like it still won't be enough. Poor preparedness, one might say, as some countries like Germany has quite a bit more hospital beds per 1000 persons (source), but it just shows that this kind of capacity was never previously needed.

 

[starryeyes]

And the responses I'm getting are why I really can't be here. I'm just trying to give you factual information that I feel needs to be known, make of it what you will but you might want to actually click on the link and really read it first. I'm just trying to find the truth like everybody else.

Take Care People.

PPS: End of the article I posted:

• The German historian René Schlott writes about the „Rendezvous with the police state„: „Buying a book, sitting on a park bench, meeting up with friends – that is now forbidden, is controlled and denounced. The democratic safeguards seem to be blown. Where and how will it end?“
  
• Several German law firms are preparing lawsuits against the measures and regulations that have been issued. A specialist in medical law writes in a press release: „The measures taken by the federal and state governments are blatantly unconstitutional and violate a multitude of basic rights of citizens in Germany to an unprecedented extent. This applies to all corona regulations of the 16 federal states. In particular, these measures are not justified by the Infection Protection Act, which was revised in no time at all just a few days ago. () Because the available figures and statistics show that corona infection is harmless in more than 95% of the population and therefore does not represent a serious danger to the general public.“
  
• The Open Letter from Professor Sucharit Bhakdi to Chancellor Angela Merkel is now available in German, English, French, Spanish, Russian, Turkish, Dutch and Estonian, other languages will follow.
  
• In a new interview, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden warns that Covid19 is dangerous but temporary, while the destruction of fundamental rights is deadly and permanent.

 

[pamojja]

For those who think that corona virus is only downplayed by selected studies, there is also a growing number of experts voicing their view without any downplaying of real risks, quite the opposite. A selection with short quotes put togehther on one site: https://off-guardian.org/2020/03/24/12-experts-questioning-the-coronavirus-panic/

Including:

​

Dr Sucharit Bhakdi is a specialist in microbiology. He was a professor at the Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz and head of the Institute for Medical Microbiology and Hygiene and one of the most cited research scientists in German history.​

​

Dr Wolfgang Wodarg is a German physician specialising in Pulmonology, politician and former chairman of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. In 2009 he called for an inquiry into alleged conflicts of interest surrounding the EU response to the Swine Flu pandemic.​

​

Dr Joel Kettner s professor of Community Health Sciences and Surgery at Manitoba University, former Chief Public Health Officer for Manitoba province and Medical Director of the International Centre for Infectious Diseases.​

​

Dr John Ioannidis Professor of Medicine, of Health Research and Policy and of Biomedical Data Science, at Stanford University School of Medicine and a Professor of Statistics at Stanford University School of Humanities and Sciences. He is director of the Stanford Prevention Research Center, and co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS).​

​

He is also the editor-in-chief of the European Journal of Clinical Investigation. He was chairman at the Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine as well as adjunct professor at Tufts University School of Medicine.​

​

As a physician, scientist and author he has made contributions to evidence-based medicine, epidemiology, data science and clinical research. In addition, he pioneered the field of meta-research. He has shown that much of the published research does not meet good scientific standards of evidence.​

​

Dr Yoram Lass is an Israeli physician, politician and former Director General of the Health Ministry. He also worked as Associate Dean of the Tel Aviv University Medical School and during the 1980s presented the science-based television show Tatzpit.​

​

Dr Pietro Vernazza is a Swiss physician specialising Infectious Diseases at the Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen and Professor of Health Policy.​

​

Frank Ulrich Montgomery is German radiologist, former President of the German Medical Association and Deputy Chairman of the World Medical Association.​

​

Prof. Hendrik Streeck is a German HIV researcher, epidemiologist and clinical trialist. He is professor of virology, and the director of the Institute of Virology and HIV Research, at Bonn University.​

​

Dr Yanis Roussel et. al. – A team of researchers from the Institut Hospitalo-universitaire Méditerranée Infection, Marseille and the Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, conducting a peer-reviewed study on Coronavirus mortality for the government of France under the ‘Investments for the Future’ programme.​

​

Dr. David Katz is an American physician and founding director of the Yale University Prevention Research Center​

​

Michael T. Osterholm is regents professor and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.​

​

Dr Peter Goetzsche is Professor of Clinical Research Design and Analysis at the University of Copenhagen and founder of the Cochrane Medical Collaboration. He has written several books on corruption in the field of medicine and the power of big pharmaceutical companies​

 

[Wayne]

I watched the entire 17-minute interview Judy Woodruff of PBS had with Anthony Fauci last Friday (link below). What really stopped me in my tracks was when she asked (at the 13:20 mark), when he "first" had the sense that "this was different"... (tip: early January).

My reaction to his reply was sort of an equal measure of "shocking" and "dismaying", and he answers succinctly (with a pretty revealing look on his face) what they knew, and when they knew it. Boggles the mind as to what could have been done at such an early date to greatly mitigate the effects of this pandemic.

Fauci on Facemasks and Staying Home as Virus Spreads

 

[pamojja]

Beside numerous other everday physicians, which in this media-efforts to create hysteria, are rarely heard:

COVID. ‘With’ ‘Of’ or ‘Because of’


6th April 2020
Here is a section from the Health Service Journal (HSJ) in the UK, discussing the current fears of NHSE (NHS England). The article is behind a paywall.

NHS England is an executive non-departmental public body of the Department of Health and Social Care. NHS England oversees the budget, planning, delivery and day-to-day operation of the commissioning side of the NHS in England as set out in the Health and Social Care Act 2012

Exclusive: NHSE to act over fears covid-19 focus could ‘do more harm than virus’

‘NHS England analysts have been tasked with the challenging task of identifying patients who may not have the virus but may be at risk of significant harm or death because they are missing vital appointments or not attending emergency departments, with both the service and public so focused on covid-19.

A senior NHS source familiar with the programme told HSJ: “There could be some very serious unintended consequences [to all the resource going into fighting coronavirus]. While there will be a lot of covid-19 fatalities, we could end up losing more ‘years of life’ because of fatalities relating to non-covid-19 health complications.

“What we don’t want to do is take our eye off the ball in terms of all the core business and all the other healthcare issues the NHS normally attends to.

“People will be developing symptoms of serious but treatable diseases, babies will be born which need immunising, and people will be developing breast lumps and need mammograms.”…

Nuffield Trust deputy director of research Sarah Scobie said it was “a considerable worry that people are keeping away from routine and urgent health services, and also from emergency departments”.
She added: “The PHE (public health England) data suggests there could be significant problems already developing for heart disease related conditions patients, for example. Attendances relating to myocardial infarction at emergency departments have dropped right down, whereas ambulance calls in relation to chest pain have gone right [up].’


I suppose my first response would not be one of great surprise. In fact, it confirms what I have been saying for some time. When the great Swine Flu epidemic (that killed hardly anyone) created the last pandemic crisis in the UK, exactly the same thing happened. If, whatever you were suffering from, wasn’t Swine Flu, it didn’t seem to matter.

In my small part of the world a small but significant number of people were diagnosed with Swine Flu. This was done over the phone, by poorly trained operatives. These people were then prescribed the (almost entirely useless Tamiflu), they then died. It turned out that they had other conditions that could, and would, have been properly treated had we not been overcome by a massive over-reaction to Swine Flu. They died because of swine flu.

Last week, in Intermediate Care, we sent two patients into the local hospital who were seriously ill. They were both sent back almost immediately. They both died. Yes, they were ill, and may have died anyway. But I believe they should both have been admitted, and treated, and they could both still be alive. They died because of COVID.

 

[pamojja]

Here an interesting Interview with Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine at Stanford University. He is a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a senior fellow at both the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and the Stanford Freeman Spogli Institute.

 

[ljimbo423]

Here an interesting Interview with Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine at Stanford University. He is a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research and a senior fellow at both the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and the Stanford Freeman Spogli Institute.

I listened to the whole discussion. I found it very interesting. The doctor seemed very humble and honest to me.

Saying multiple times that we just don't know the total number of people infected. So the percentage of people that die from this is unknown. Until we can test large portions of societies, with antibody testing.

To see how many people have been infected and recovered.

 

[Hip]

Saying multiple times that we just don't know the total number of people infected. So the percentage of people that die from this is unknown.

What does he say about the data from the Diamond Princess, in which nearly everyone was tested, so the death rate was easy to calculate?

 

[ljimbo423]

What does he say about the data from the Diamond Princess, in which nearly everyone was tested, so the death rate was easy to calculate?

I didn't hear him mention the Diamond Princess. He just talked about the population at large.

 

[Hip]

I didn't hear him mention the Diamond Princess. He just talked about the population at large.

That's a bit of an omission: the Diamond Princess is where some really good data was obtained.

Also Germany is a good country to determine the death rate, as they were very thorough, tracing contacts and testing even mild cases. Death rate by German calculations is 0.6%.

 

[percyval577]

Also Germany is a good country to determine the death rate, as they were very thorough, tracing contacts and testing even mild cases. Death rate by German calculations is 0.6%.

The official rate has risen within a week or so, from 0.6% up to 1.5% yesterday.

This could mean, I think:

• more vulnerable people are getting affected
• the rate of infection has gotten higher than the number of tests (underdeternimation is higher now)
• it reflects the time lag

The calculated rate done is the crude rate, so not adjusted to the delay (I am too brain fogged to grasp the whole thing).

(In the PDF of this article there are two graphs calculated with the same number, showing the different outcomes, last page:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.12.20022434v2 Mizumotot et al)

 

[percyval577]

• Several German law firms are preparing lawsuits against the measures and regulations that have been issued. A specialist in medical law writes in a press release: „The measures taken by the federal and state governments are blatantly unconstitutional and violate a multitude of basic rights of citizens in Germany to an unprecedented extent. This applies to all corona regulations of the 16 federal states. In particular, these measures are not justified by the Infection Protection Act, which was revised in no time at all just a few days ago. () Because the available figures and statistics show that corona infection is harmless in more than 95% of the population and therefore does not represent a serious danger to the general public.“

The theoretical statement might well be true, and I personally still think that it is indeed. And I hope that this will show up in the next weeks. The lockdown might show up to be relatively unimportant, and other external parameters like seasons, pollution and unknowns might account.

But it is by no means allowed to say, "Err, what are the statistics now and for the past weeks/months? So, well, these patients right now we don´t need to help, they will die anyway."

 

[pamojja]

That's a bit of an omission: the Diamond Princess is where some really good data was obtained.

Dr. Bhattacharya is concerned about a representative sample of the whole population, all age groups, localities, social status... Therefore can't consider the cruise ship as good sample.


PS: Additionally this study will NOT be with the PCR test which only may find active virus, but Antibody testing.


PPS: In Austria they took a representative sample of 2000s on Monday. Result will show presumably in view a days. But still different due to using PCR only, to what Dr. Bhattacharya has in mind with antibody testing.

 

[andyguitar]

Dr. Bhattacharya is concerned about a representative sample of the whole population, all age groups, localities, social status... Therefore can't consider the cruise ship as good sample.

No it's not a good sample.

 

[Hip]

the rate of infection has gotten higher than the number of tests (underdeternimation is higher now)

That's the likely explanation, as in the early stages of the pandemic, it is easier to do contact tracing and test everyone. Once more and more are infected, it's much harder to trace everyone.

Dr. Bhattacharya is concerned about a representative sample of the whole population, all age groups, localities, social status... Therefore can't consider the cruise ship as good sample.

That concern has already been addressed and adjusted in the studies, to provide a good figure for the death rate.

The cruise ship had a higher proportion of older people, therefore the death rate will be higher. The unadjusted death rate on the ship is 1.2%.

But once the death rate is adjusted to account for the higher level of older people, it goes down to 0.5% — see this study. So in the general population, you would expect 0.5% of infected people to die.

That tallies closely with the accurate German figure of a 0.6% death rate.

 

[pamojja]

That tallies closely with the accurate German figure of a 0.6% death rate.

The problem is still such estimates are based on models, which can turn out completely wrong. Thereby I rather go with the facts about covid-19. And real evidence.

 

[Hip]

The problem is still such estimates are based on models, which can turn out completely wrong. Thereby I rather go with the facts about covid-19. And real evidence.

No, the German data is not based on models. The Germans were thorough in tracing and testing everyone who was infected, and their data is purely empirical.

 

[pamojja]

If mainly only those who need hospital care are tested - those without symptoms or those with symptoms told to stay home - those who are really also infected is an unknown number. Therefore the percentage speculated.

That's the main concern of many specialists, also of Dr. Bhattacharya, and therefore they really want to find out not dependent on probably very wrong modeling based on worse case scenarios.

 

[Wayne]

The cruise ship had a higher proportion of older people, therefore the death rate will be higher.

The problem is still such estimates are based on models, which can turn out completely wrong.

I don't put too much stock in the cruise ship numbers. Yes, there was a higher proportion of older people, but not all old people fit in the same category. Those who are on a cruise ship are likely economically well off, and this cohort--in general--are in better health than those in a lower economic segment. Then there's always the chance it's an outlier. This cruise ship could have had a fatality rate of 10%, or 0%, but that wouldn't put it in anywhere near most death rates around the world.

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the highest death rates that are coming from Italy won't eventually be traced back to the highly polluted conditions these people lived in. In this article--LA doctor seeing success with hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 -- he stress that hydroxychloroquine "opens channels" which allow zinc into the cells to kill the virus, and so it needs to be taken with zinc for it to be effective. My understanding is that heavy metals knock zinc out of their receptor sites, and so a highly polluted area could easily lead to people having zinc deficiencies.

 

[Hip]

If mainly only those who need hospital care are tested - those without symptoms or those with symptoms told to stay home - those who are really also infected is an unknown number. Therefore the percentage speculated.

As I said, the Germans used contact tracing and testing.

Contact tracing means if you find one infected person, you trace and test all the people who have had contact with them: friends, family, work colleagues, shop assistants if they bought items in a shop. Contact tracing takes a lot of time and effort. But it allows you to find anyone in the social circle of an infected person who might also be infected.

This is why the German death rate figures are considered accurate, because the Germans did an excellent job of testing everyone who might have been infected.