‘Anyone who has tested Covid-19 positive but subsequently died at a later date of any cause will be included on the PHE Covid-19 death figures… even if they had a heart attack or were run over by a bus three months later’
I have been shouting this from the rooftops since the middle of March, while the media and much of the general public have been pushing the idea that in fact the death toll is actually higher than is being advertised.
There was never any logic to that narrative, the numbers were always going to be inflated, to some degree this is understandable – after all the World Health Organisation declared a pandemic, (extremely incompetent) Scientists were predicting, based on computer models, that millions upon millions were going to die around the World; so assumptions of causality of mortality were to be expected.
But this was not merely human error made in times of crisis, these over inflated numbers were caused by man-made policy which perpetuated fear within a population.
After months of us preaching about over-inflated numbers, the mainstream news and the rest of the population finally wake up to this reality:
It appears that PHE compiles “out of hospital” deaths by searching the NHS database for whether that person ever tested positive.
It then apparently fails to consider how long ago that person tested positive or their actual cause of death.
“By this PHE definition, no-one with Covid in England is allowed to ever recover from their illness,” Professors Yoon K Loke and Carl Heneghan, who discovered the statistical flaw, explain.
So if someone tested positive for Covid back in March and then got knocked over by a bus in June, well you guessed it – They were recorded as another Covid death!
This is the example Dr. Loke, a spokesman from the Department of Health used in his statement:
‘Anyone who has tested Covid-19 positive but subsequently died at a later date of any cause will be included on the PHE Covid-19 death figures… even if they had a heart attack or were run over by a bus three months later.’
Matt Hancock the UK’s Health Secretary has now ordered an urgent review into this major flaw in the statistical recording of deaths in the pandemic.
According to The Guardian:
The UK health secretary, Matt Hancock, is ordering an urgent review of the daily Covid-19 death statistics produced by Public Health England, after it emerged that they may include recovered former sufferers who could have died of other causes.
As you would expect, they are downplaying the significance this major flaw in data gathering would have had on the deaths data, in fact Dr Loke said:
The ‘vast majority’ of Covid-19 deaths are correctly identified.
Which would be almost believable if there were no other major flaws in how this pandemic has been handled.
The Tip of the Iceberg
So we now know for a fact that if you have tested positive for Covid and then later died, regardless of the cause you will go down as a Covid death. This alone is significant in itself, but if that wasn’t enough now consider the fact that the PCR testing kits used to determine if someone has the virus or not is extremely unreliable.
“Diagnostic tests, typically involving a nasopharyngeal swab, can be inaccurate in two ways,” said Steven Woloshin, MD, MS, in a news release announcing a new report that “examines challenges and implications of false-negative COVID-19 tests.”
Woloshin is an internist, a professor at Dartmouth Institute, and co-director of the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth.
“A false-positive result mistakenly labels a person infected, with consequences including unnecessary quarantine and contact tracing,” he stated in the news release.
“False-negative results are far more consequential, because infected persons who might be asymptomatic may not be isolated and can infect others.”
The actual rate of false-positives is relatively unknown, false negatives a reported to be extremely high, often stated in the region of between 20% to as high as 60%. But the as I said the false-positive rate is not really discussed as much.
What we do know is this, PCR testing is not an accurate method for determining whether someone has a virus in their system. The inventor of the PCR tests even said:
“PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers.
Although there is a common misimpression that the viral load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV.
The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves.”
I’ve actually pulled that quote directly from Reuters own fact checker which claim the quote is taken out of context and doesn’t mean the PCR tests are not suitable for virus detection.
And while they are correct, in that Mullis’ quote has been largely taken out of context, the reality of what he was saying still equates to an inaccurate method of testing.
But that’s not the only only issue we have to consider, exactly what are these PCR tests checking for?
Well, firstly it must be made clear that while the World claims to have isolated the virus, this doesn’t appear to be entirely true. There have been four separate claims to isolating the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but in all cases their is little evidence to suggest the material obtained and isolated was in fact responsible for Covid-19.
But additionally, while the material obtained was then isolated leaving an RNA sequence, it was a partial sequence. Much of the alleged virus died in the growth medium. The complete virus has been finished using a computer modelling programme.
Now, I accept I may have got my understanding wrong about this and I urge you to look into this yourself. If you believe my above statements to be inaccurate and misleading, please speak up, because few people on either side of the discussion want to have a fully transparent conversation about it.
The following interview with the now infamous and controversial MIT, Duke, and Medical University of South Carolina graduate Dr. Andrew Kaufman goes into this in more detail.
I’m not telling you everything he states is true, in fact I have many questions I’d like to ask him myself as certain claims he makes I cannot quite get my head around, particularly in respect to germ theory, or should I say anti-germ theory.
Kaufman has been widely discredited in the mainstream news and science communities, but as with Kaufmans claims, I also have many questions I’d like to ask surrounding the debunking of his claims.
The claim of isolation of the virus appears to be a deception, while indeed I believe we have a full genome sequence of something, a sequence they identify as SARS-CoV-2, it does not appear to be an actual real life full sequence, a large proportion of the sequencing seems to be computer generated and what sequencing they obtained was taken from an assumed piece of genetic material belonging to a virus.
With so many questions and uncertainties, there are inevitably more questions we need to ask about the PCR test. Are we checking for SARS-CoV-2, or are we checking for something that exists in us all under certain conditions?
Or are we checking for simply any Coronavirus, or another Coronavirus that is genetically similar to SARS-CoV-2?
I’m not going to state this is the case, as many in the alternative media are doing – but neither am I going to ignore the huge contradictions and obvious uncertainties being published in the media and from the scientific community.
The Lockdown Pandemic
Finally, we need to talk about what will probably be one of the most recorded and written about historical events in generations, the Lockdown and measures taken to ‘flatten the curve’ as they like to continually say.
While its true there has been an excess of deaths this season in many parts of the World, specifically the UK, we shouldn’t jump the gun and assume this is due to the virus.
If you look at when the spike in excessive deaths began in the UK they correlate almost to the day when the lockdown restrictions began. This same correlation exists in just about every nation that implemented similar measures.
We know that in fact 95% of reported deaths from Covid-19 in the UK has serious pre-existing health conditions, we also know that the protocols used for care homes, where the majority of these very sick people were homed, was nothing short of murder.
In the week to April 10, care homes lost 1,000 residents to coronavirus, official statistics report. Sector groups, however, believe the true figure to be far higher. Counting the fatalities of individuals suspected of having COVID-19 — in addition to confirmed sufferers — the number is nearer 4,000, says the National Care Forum (NCF) 
The reason for this insanely high number of deaths in care homes can be attributed almost entirely to the way in which the Government handled the pandemic.
UK ministers ordered 15,000 hospital beds to be vacated by 27 March. Making beds available was part of the “national effort” and “will help to save thousands of lives” they told care homes. Guidelines said there was no need to test discharged patients because Covid-19 sufferers “can be safely cared for in a care home”.
That’s right, UK ministers with their abundance in common sense and critical thinking decided that shifting thousands of elderly patients from hospitals back into care homes regardless of their COVID status would be a good idea.
We know the virus is dangerous to one group of people, one very small minority group of people the elderly, particularly the elderly with pre-existing health conditions. So basically, everybody in a care home.
This decision was catastrophic in the damage it caused, entire care homes were almost wiped out. Then add to this the lack of staff working at these care homes due to the virus and isolation protocols, plus the building fear in staff from this advertised ‘deadly virus’.
They would have stood a better chance if we had lined the care home patients up against a wall and given a machine gun to a blind man and told him to shoot. Utterly unforgivable.
While this has been the greatest catastrophe throughout the pandemic, its not the only. The lockdown itself has caused untold stresses on society, from unemployment to domestic violence, it has disconnected people from each other and in many cases entirely isolated individuals into a box feeding them with fear from the 24/7 live coverage of the pandemic.
The saddest part is, the real devastation caused by state measures around the World has not even begun.
What are your thoughts on all of this, I still hear many people denying that the numbers are over inflated, in fact many believe the numbers have been under-counted in an attempt to bolster the Governments opinion polls?
How this conclusion is reached with everything we now know is beyond me, but if you are one of those people I’m interested in just how such a scenario has occurred based on the mortality statistical protocols put in place for the virus.
Whatever your opinion, please speak freely here.