As is explained in this long article I must of necessity write of specific ways in which statistics on COVID — 19 deaths are being abused in The United Kingdom, please bear with me; details may differ in your country but with the same effect, to increase levels of fear in the general population over a very average ‘winter ‘flu season. The system has been so corrupted here that what I intended to be an item of between 1000 and 1250 words has ended up close to 5000.
The TV news and radio bulletins and the printed front pages of mainstream media (MSM) have, every day since the outbreak of the Coronavirus variant known as COVID19, gleefully reported the daily deaths from the disease, using these shockingly high (but still lower than the kill rate of seasonal flu, as the justification for the lockdown, that has brought the economies of the world’s most economically developed nations to a standstill and effectively placed entire populations under house arrest. And amazingly, given that people sitting at home twiddling their thumbs as they watched their jobs evaporate and their debts pile up, , have not resorted to widespread rioting and civil disobedience. Has it really been so easy to convince us that us that the only way to save the human race is by us all becoming snivelling cowards, living in abject fear of an alleged virus (nobody has actually proved it exists as yet, isolating and identifying a virus is extremely difficult according to medical researchers.
UK Nightingale emergency hospitals built to cope with the predicted thousands of patients seriously ill with COVID — 19 have largely stood emply or treated only a handful of patients because the ‘models’ of the pandemic were hopelesly wrong (picture: getty via inews.co.uk)
If politicians, academics, media pundits and megalomaniacal, psychopathic Silicon Valley billionaires are to be believed, only the most lucrative (because of its being mandated globally,) vaccine ever devised can possibly save us, but in the meantime we can either remain under house arrest or download an app to our smartphones which will track our movements and by means of a bluetooth interaction with similar spyware devices will record everybody we are in contact with who is unfortunate enough to own a smartphone. Lucky you if you are one of those people who does not have a smartphone or like someone I know (and I’m naming no names here,) was bullied into buying one by his son and daughter but on finding it was nothing but a vehicle for enabling Google to invade his privacy, he hurled it across the room soon after first switching it on (I think it is somewhere behind the bookshelves now.)
The COVID — 19 daily deaths figures are the reason millions will undoubtedly download contact tracing (aka total State surveillance) apps. Presence of the app on their smartphones to will help qualify them for an immunity passport which they can produce when someone wearing a black uniform with losts of silver trimming, and very shiny calf length boots, deamands, “Show me your papers! Raus! Raus!
In the post-COVID — 19 slave society, the immunity passport, showing not so much that you are disease free as that your movements are being tracked by technology, will be your permit to leave home.
But, joking aside, how reliable are the statistics? Have you not felt the least little bit suspicious when only hours after a new batch of even more stringent constraints on freedom of movement, association and speech have been announced, news breaks of a sudden surge in deaths. And did you notice that accompanying these increase in the daily death numbers came a subtle change in language, first from “died of Coronavirus,” to “died with coronavirus,” (i.e. was infected with COVID-19 at the time of death though it was not the cause or possibly not even a contributory factor, and finally to “Coronavirus — related deaths,” (your guess as to what this means is as good as mine, suggested definitions include “did not have coronavirus but knew someone who did,” and “died of cancer because potentially life saving surgery was delayed due to the Coronavirus outbreak.”
While every death is a tragedy to the family and friends of the deceased, what do the numbers printed under lurid headlines and breathlessly reported in hysterical tones by excitable newsreaders actually mean? What do they really tell us about what is happening; is a previously unknown but deadly virus sweeping the world or have the statistics been manipulated been manipulated, inflated, fudged and exploited by unscupulous agencies to scare us into surrendering rights and freedoms? How reliable are the statistics? Let’s take a close look …
Here, in the intersts of accuracy I must report on the system of recording deaths as it operates in the UK, a system which I am unfortunately familiar with having recently lost a close family member. Most of the developed nations are similar, but not quite the same, in the way they record our shufflings on and off this mortal coil. One way in which they are exactly the same however, is in the way COVID — 19 deaths are being deliberately miscounted. So wherever you live, I will be describing how you are being deceived about the seriousness of COVID — 19 even if the local processes differ.
The process for registering a death in England and Wales is the same no matter what the cirumstances of the death. A qualified doctor needs to record the cause of death on the Medical Certificate of Cause of Death (MCCD). For deaths at home this would normally be the family doctor or a locum, in the case of deaths in hospital it would be a suitably qualified member of the staff and in the cases involving deaths in public places it would probably be a police medical examiner.
Once the death is certified in this way, the certifying doctor must notify an official known as the Medical Examiner, who is part of the coroners office, for a corroborating opinion. Providing the certifying doctor and Medical Examiner have no doubts about the cause of death and no irregularities or suspicions are suspected there is no need for further involvement of the coroner.
The second opinion of the Medical Examiner (another qualified doctor) was introduced in 2016 following a series of high profile systemic abuses. Examples are the mass murderer Dr Harold Shipman who bumped off over two hundred old ladies from his patient list, and doctors at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust and Southern Health NHS Trust, conspired to cover up numerous cases of criminal negligence and malpractice arising from misguided efforts to meet performance targets, by improperly completing MCCDs.
Once these steps are completed a family member or close friend (the informant,) has to attend the district registrars office with the Medical Certificate of Cause of Death), confirm all relevant parties are satisfied that the recorded suggested cause of death is accurate. If no issues are raised, the death certificate can be issued to the informant by the Local Registrar who completes the process by which the death recorded.
In spite of the introduction of digital technology to speed the process, registering deaths has changed little over the last century. The Office Of National Statistics (ONS) is the government agency responsible for accurately recording all registered deaths in England and Wales and thus has until recently been the only provider of statistics on death rates, effects of deisease outbreaks on the population and so on.
To reiterate, the ONS records all registered deaths no matter where they occurred in England and Wales. Whether the deceased died in hospital, a care home or in the community, once the registration process is completed at local level, the ONS is given a copy of the documentation to add the details to their statistics.
The consistency and rigidity of this system has for years ensured that public health, social security and other government departments have accurate and up to date information and informed managers and policy makers. Safeguards built into the system and improved over time has enabled the ONS to provide reliable mortality statistics to the UK government, and its agencies, to confirm deaths for legal purposes, and to facilitate the settlement of wills and claims on property. Other developed nations have benefitted from similar systems, while it is not necessary for government to be aware of our religion or sexual preference is is essential to have information on who is alive and dead and what the deceased died of. If we did not know how many people were dying of diabetes the people responsible for health policy would not know how dangerous excessive consumption of refined sugar can be.
Weekly statistics are produced and published by the ONS once the information has been collected by hospitals, medical practices, care homes. Obviously it takes time to gather and collate that information which results in the statistics for deaths in each weekly period being released eleven days after the week ending date.
This does not suit the twenty — four hour rolling news cycle, news hungry media are constantly seeking sensation to spark the interest of viewers and listeners and an eleven days delay on reported COVID 19 deaths does not serve their business model which needs daily and even hourly updates. It is also inconvenient for bureaucrats tasked with persuading the public to meekly accept being stripped of their civil rights and liberties.
This need for sensation, as a sales aid and also a propaganda tool, has led the media, with the complicity of the government, to gather COVID 19 mortality information from a variety of sources. Some from the NHS, some from the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) and eventually the ONS.
Now the Care Quality Commission have also been thrown into the mix.
Ultimately, all of these deaths need to be registered just once in a central database. The ONS will record them and each will be counted just once, thus it will be possible to know how many died, the causes of death and the trends identified. That is why the UK’s ONS, and the official recorder of statistics in national, state, provincial or regional governments around the world provide the only legally recognised statistics on all deaths
Except in the cases of deaths linked, no matter how tenuously, to COVID — 19 .
March 25, 2020: The assault on freedoms begins.
The Coronavirus Act 2020, popularly referred to as the biggest assault on individual freedom since World War 2, received Royal assent (The Queen signed it into law,) on March 25th. Apart from placing the entire nation on lockdown, closing pubs, restaurants and all shops selling goods deemed ‘non — essential,’ and cancelling all sports and entertainment events, this law had significant implications for the registration of deaths and the accuracy of ONS data in relation to COVID 19.
Not only were all NHS doctors indemnified against claims of negligence during the lockdown, it also removed the need for coroner’s inquests to be heard by a jury in cases of death from the notifiable disease of COVID — 19. A notifiable disease is a serious infection that could lead to an epidemic, previously in the UK all notifiable diseases were subject to an inquest to ensure steps had been taken to stem the spread of infection. These elements of the new law should concern us all because they facilitate cover ups and the dissemination of false information, but they are also part of a batch of changes which bypass the precision of the existing system where COVID — 19 deaths are concerned. We have heard and read of similar things happening in Italy, Spain, the USA and Canada. German doctors refused to cooperate with such blatant manipulation of information, which is why Germany’s death to infection ratio from COVID — 19 is much lower than other developed nations, the German healthcare providers have only been recording COVID — 19 as the cause of death in cases where it was the primary cause of death, not where patients have died while their brother — in — law’s uncle’s wife was being treated for COVID — 19
The UK’s state healthcare provider, the NHS issued guidance to assist doctors in complying with the new legislation although in reality it makes the process far more simple. As before any qualified doctor can sign the MCCD. There is no need for the scrutiny of a second Medical Examiner, although this was often only a formaility. The Medical Examiner, or any other doctor, can sign the MCCD alone. The safeguards introduced in 2016 to prevent abuses were removed, but only in the case of COVID 19.
(It is perhaps worth noting here that one of the reasons for the double authentication was that the notorious serial killer Dr. Shipman (sic) would inject elderly patients with a lethal dose of diamorphine and then write out an MCCD citing natural causes for the cause of death. How easy has it now been made for somebody with an incentive to cheat to enter COVID — 19 as a cause of death. I have read, though I cannot confirm the truth of it at this stage, that hospitals and medical practices are to be given an additional payment for every coronavirus case they deal with.)
Doctors do not now need to have examined the deceased before signing the MCCD. If it is impractical (or inconvenient?) for the doctor who treated the deceased to complete the MCCD, providing they report that the deceased probably had COVID 19, any other qualified doctor can sign the death certificate as a COVID 19 death.
There is now no provision for a doctor to have even seen the deceased prior to issuing the MCCD. A video link consultation within the 4 week period leading up to the patient’s death, is deemed sufficient for them to pronounce death from COVID 19. even though it is estimated that after infection there is only a two week incubation period before symptoms appear.
Under the new law, death from CO\vID — 19 can potentially be certified without any examination at all, and if a coroner agrees then a COVID 19 death can be registered on the suspicion that the patient probably died from COVID — 19.
The coroner’s agreement is efectively guaranteed. On the 26th March the UK State released guidance from the Chief Coroner. This was intended as advice to all coroners in cases of COVID 19 referral.
The Chief Coroner cannot envisage a situation in the current pandemic where a coroner should be engaging in interviews with the media or making any public statements to the press.”
This thinly veiled threat to coroners maket clear that speaking to the media about any concerns over the ease with which false information could be accumulated would be considered a breech of judicial conduct, a career-ending offence. By now most readers should be thinking that the whole business stinks as repugnantly as the Wuhan wet market on a warm day.
The Coronavirus Act 2020 also relaxes the requirements incumbent on a qualified informant, who apart from formally notifying the registrar of births, marriages and deaths, by presenting the MCCD and confirming the cause of death on the MCCD, no longer needs to be anyone related to or even acquainted with the deceased. A hospital official, someone who is ‘in charge of a body’ (a ,funeral director) can perform this vital function. “For registration: where next of kin/informant are following self-isolation procedures, the arrangement for relatives (etc) should be for an alternative informant who has not been in contact with the patient to collect the MCCD and deliver to the registrar for registration purposes. The provisions in the Coronavirus Act will enable this to be done electronically as directed by the Registrar General.”
To summarise, the MCCD signing doctor need not have seen the patient, while they were alive or post mortem, the “qualified” informant can actually be so unqualified they have neither met the deceased nor know anything about their life or the circumstances surrounding their death or any long term health problems that may have been a factor in the death.
What could possibly go wrong? Actually it occurs to me that I could get a friend to register my death, then claim my insurance for myself and clear off to live somewhere near the Mediterranean.
This ridiculously lax death registration process prompted the ONS to issue guidance to doctors signing MCCDs. Not only is there no need for an examination to pronounce death from COVID19, nor is there any necessity for a positive test or even an indicative CT scan. Wow, I don’t even need to fake my own death, I could perhaps get away with simply sending a text message to the local registry office and saying, “I’m dead, can you send me the paperwork please. Below are two examples showing the abuses that are happening in the UK now.
The problem with this laxity in diagnosing COVID — 19 as cause of death is the symptoms of are barely distinguishable from a range of other respiratory illnesses. A study from the University of Toronto found:
“The symptoms can vary, with some patients remaining asymptomatic, while others present with fever, cough, fatigue, and a host of other symptoms. The symptoms may be similar to patients with influenza or the common cold.”
Furthermore there is no requirement for a post mortem to confirm the presence of COVID — 19. Guidance from the Royal College of Pathologists states:
“If a death is believed to be due to confirmed COVID-19 infection, there is unlikely to be any need for a post-mortem examination to be conducted and the Medical Certificate of Cause of Death should be issued.”
This is another departure from custom and practice which, intentionally it must be presumed, makes abuses of the system simple. Clear causation between the underlying cause and the direct cause is imperative to establish the fact. Just because someone tested positive for the SARS-CoV-2 (SC2) virus, or a doctor, nurse or hospital janitor says somebody had COVID — 19 it doesn’t mean they developed the associated syndrome of COVID19.
If You Torture Data Enought If Will Tell You Anything You Want It To
Most medical professionals and healthcare workers, as well as other professionals involved, coroners, forensic pathologists, ONS statisticians and funeral directors are not in the business of misleading the public, neither are most politicians. It may surprise people that I should write such a thing but when it comes to misleading information politicians are as much sinned against as sinning. So why is legislation concerning the response to the Coronavirus pandemic apparently designed to not just encourage false information is given to the public but to guarantee it? Why, in the case of COVID19 deaths, has the State created a registration system so ambiguous it is virtually useless, and why is pressure being put on hospitals, medical practices, care homes, and coroner’s offices to falsify causes of death and inflate the numbers being reported in panic — mongering mainstream news. reports. The statistical product recorded by the ONS, despite their best efforts, is correspondingly worthless. The culprits are the bureaucrats, the high ranking civil servants who drafted the legislation. What they hope to gain from such a massive deception we can only speculate on at this stage, but I would suspect that promoting the case for a world government is one of the leading contenders. Just think how many gigantic bureaucracies would be spawned by centralising the control and management of everything in the world.
The government, supported by the mainstream media has tried to manipulate the generation of mortality data so that every death reported is somehow linked to the pandemic, as proof of the threat to human society posed by COVID19. The numbers being cited in media reports on COVID19 as the underlying cause of death should be treated with great scepticism. Not only are deaths being counted several times over as the various parties involved make their separate reports (watch for the weasel words, “the number of coronaviris related deaths reported today,” is one I have noticed, not “the number of people who died of coronavirus yesterdy, but reported today. These two values are very different things.)
At the beginning of the outbreak the daily news reports were based on the figures of COVID19 deaths released by the NHS via the DHSC. These were the numbers of people who died having tested positive. As discussed, a positive test for SC2 doesn’t necessarily mean you suffered any health impact from COVID19. In addition, the test itself has proved to have a varying degree of reliability, so we see that right from the off, the government was cheating. Even so the death rate was not high enough to scare people into accepting their democratic homelands being turned into police states
The plan was failing, the public had sussed that COVID — 19 was not a killer plague that would eventually make The Black Death look like an incompetent amateur. People who tested positive were, in large numbers, reporting no ill effects or only trivial symptoms. However, the reliance upon positive tests changed on March 29th.
The government instructed the ONS not only to ascribe to Coronavirus all registered COVID19 deaths, where patients had tested positive, but also where COVID19 was merely suspected. In combination with the pressure on doctors and hospitals to falsely attribute deaths, this ‘mention’ of COVID19, further divorced official statistics from the reality of the pandemic.
The move resulted in a sharp increase in COVID19 fatalities not because more people were dying from it, but because the was in which COVID19 deaths were recorded had changed. Any mention of COVID19 anywhere on the death certificate, regardless of other underlying conditions, such as heart failure, dementia or cancer, were to be recorded as COVID19 deaths by the ONS.
This artificial inflation of COVID19 death numbers has distorted the ONS data throughout the outbreak. While the official narrative informs us that these new figures better reflect the reality of COVID19 mortality and therefore the threat it poses, the truth is we are moving further away from any realistic record of what is happening.
The records in newspaper archives show the methodology for counting COVID — 19 deaths has been changed at convenient points to inflate and the mortality statistics and quell incipient public unrsts at the continuing lockdown conditions. To recap, shortly after the virus peak of infection and the start of the lockdown, government instructed the ONS to include “mentions” of suspected links between patients and COVID — 19. Then, as the recorded numbers of deaths were dropping, pressure from certain politicians and the media prompted the release of more figures from the social care sector, the places where the old and frail and people with very serious health problems reside, deaths which were already being reported via the weekly ONS figures. From April 29th they have introduced additional figures provided by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) which collectes data from — you guessed it — hospitals, hospices and care homes.
If the figures provided by the NHS are questionable, the figures from the CQC are pure fantasy, on a poar with the whackiest soap opera story lines . The CQC is the nominally independent regulator of health and social care in England, a QUANGO (Quasi — autonomous non governmental organisation). During the COVID19 outbreak neither government nor the NHS has required care homes or community care providers to notify them of suspected cases. It has also suspended all inspections. Which is OK because as you will remember, all deaths are reported to and recorded by the Office Of National Statistics.
The ONS has revealed what statistics from the CQC will be based on :
“The inclusion of a death in the published figures as being the result of COVID-19 is based on the statement of the care home provider, which may or may not correspond to a medical diagnosis or test result, or be reflected in the death certification.”
Most care home providers are not medically trained. Their judgement regarding whether or not the decedent had COVID19 may well be the result of a once weekly phone call with a GP. Guidance to GP’s from NHS England states that Possible COVID19 patients should be identified primarily by weekly check-ins online.
The ONS adds:
There is no validation built into the quality of data on collection. Fields may be left blank or may contain information that is contradictory, and this may not be resolved at the point of publication. Most pertinent to this release are place of death and whether the death was as a result of confirmed or suspected coronavirus.
This is the system by which the CQC will collect the data for the ONS reports. Once someone, either in a care home or cared for in the community, is assumed to have died of COVID19, based upon the best guess of the care provider following a chat with a local GP, in keeping with the process we have already discussed, their MCCD will be signed off as a COVID19 death. How anyone can consider the statistics from care providers an accurate and reliable record of COVID19 deaths is difficult to envisage. Nonetheless, that is what we are asked to believe.
Alternative news sites, online commentators and a few whistleblowers who were quickly removed from their official positions after voicing their doubts, have complained loudly about the statistical frauds being perpetrated, but none of this has prevented central government and the MSM from reporting every death as proof of the deadliness of COVID19. Claims relating to COVID19 as the cause of death in thousands of cases per week should be treated as pure propaganda.
It is not possible to identify how many people have died as a direct result of COVID19 either from the registration of deaths or the resultant statistics. This is not the fault of medical practitioners or statisticians. It is caused by a State response to a claimed pandemic which has rendered the most crucial processes, and the data gleaned from them, a statistical nonsense.
The narrative being presented on the back of this farrago of statistical misinformation, is designed to convince the public of the severity of the outbreak in the UK, with similar exercises in spreadinf fear and panic being reported from The USA and Canada, Germany, France, Italy and Spain. There is clearly high excess mortality (by which the statisticians mean figures higher than the year — round weekly average,) at the moment. Thanks to the lockdown, this is partly due to the NHS being essentially closed to everyone other than suspected COVID19 patients, with the result we have heard from whistle blowing hospitral staff, that the wards are half empty as the numbers of people developing symptoms so severe they need hospital treatment being only a fraction of that predicted by the mathematical models.
Early reports have already noted a significant health impact from the serious conditions going untreated due to the lockdown. People requiring treatment for of other potentially fatal conditions aren’t getting it due to surgery and variopus therapies being deferred indefinitely. This was even acknowledged by the UK’s Chief Medical Officer Chris Witty his the daily briefing on April 30th:
“…You have the direct deaths from coronavirus but also indirect deaths. Part of which is caused by the NHS and public health services not being able to do what they normally can to look after people with other conditions….It is therefore important…..to do the other important things like urgent cancer care, elective surgery and all the other thing like screening….which we need to do to keep people healthy.”
How many people have died of other causes, due to the lockdown, only to be registered as COVID19 deaths? We just don’t know and because the statistics have been rigged to big up the threat of COVID — 19 and now the ONS have no way of discovering the truth.
However we do know, thanks to the ONS, the total all cause mortality as a percentage of population in England and Wales over recent decades. This analysis shows us, while excess mortality this year is high, it is by no means unprecedented. In fact, as a percentage of population, it is notably lower to the comparable years of 1995, 1996, 1998 and 1999. Yet none of these years necessitated the shut down of the economy nor the dire health consequences of closing the NHS to all but a few patients infected with a virus know in most cases to cause only mild symptoms.
The Coronavirus Response Is The Biggest Assault On Freedom Since World War 2
Coronavirus deaths: Are The Authorities Deceiving Us?
Is This The Smoking Gun That Proves China Has Lied About The Coronavirus Outbreak
Total Surveillance: Contact-tracing app will be ‘key part’ of UK government’s Covid-19 ‘surveillance programme’
Statistics, Graphs and Hockey Sticks (poem)