Guess pvn wasn’t content fighting CN in just one thread.
Anyway, it seems the Czech strategy of doing nothing is going to be the plan for the foreseeable future. A lot of talk but nothing new is happening. Granted, it’s better than what we had under Babis most of the time but there seems to be no clear endgame in sight.
In better news, there is a hypothetical chance that a Czech woman will go to prison for up to eight years for spreading vaccine misinformation
Last year when people were just starting to get vaccinated she claimed that it was killing people. Some places temporarily stopped vaccinating people in care homes which led to deaths. Since it happened during a state of emergency, she ended up breaking temporary laws that were set during that time. So she could indeed be imprisoned for this.
Her response to this was to announce her run for president. I guess she sees that as her only path to immunity since she’s guilty as sin. Doubt she’ll be in prison. Probably fined another amount that she’ll refuse to pay and misinformation will continue to spread unabated.
The nuance you are missing is this is not a take. And, if it were a take, it’s not the guy presenting the numbers’ take - it what the FOI to the gubberment reported.
Cn said:
Bolded is blantantly wrong
ONS figures show…
Quite simple really.
The government reported that from their figures, the Office of National Statistics figues, numbers equating to 10% of the deaths had no underlying conditions, the other 90% of deaths did have underlying conditions - regardless of what killed them.
You must remeber we have 91% of eligible people with a least 1 vax so the UK doesn’t need to dumb shit down on the off-chance foreign anti-vaxxers can’t read a simple question.
90% of people who die from covid have underlying health risks != 90% of covid deaths are actually from other things.
It’s still covid killing them. To say otherwise is conspiracy theory garbage.
And the underlying message of all of this, “Only people with health risks have much risk of dying from covid, so it’s no big deal!” talk is that we should just stop worrying about COVID.
It ignores the reality that a huge percentage of people are high risk. In the US the estimate is about 40% to 60% depending on who all you include. It’s probably a little lower in the UK because of less obesity, I think the rate there is maybe 10% lower.
The other thing is a lot of young people who have one health risk still consider themselves healthy and don’t really think of themselves that way, and thus don’t consider themselves at high risk of covid.
So it’s very dangerous and disingenuous messaging.
Yes, I get it. But that wasn’t the question the FOI asked. It asked for the number that died without underlyers.
If I place an FOI to the Office of National Statistics asking ‘how many buses were late in the month of Jan’, I’m expecting an answer with numbers rather than loads of lines stating ‘but it was snowing at the time’
I think the right wingers had shown their true colors enough that #5 wouldn’t have been the biggest shock. I think would’ve all said “yeah that sounds about right”.
That’s fine, the issue is not that the data exists. The data should exist.
The issue is how people choose to present it and talk about it, and what points they attempt to extrapolate out to make.
It’s very useful to say, “Hey, if you’re over this age, this weight, or have one of these conditions you should be aware that you’re very high risk. This applies to XX% of our population.”
It’s very damaging to say, “Hey, this is kind of overblown, 90% of the people dying have serious health problems. Healthy people are doing just fine!”
Anyone who has been a regular in this thread the last two years should be aware of this and should be aware that the vast majority of the people saying the second thing are either:
Pushing anti-mask/anti-precaution rhetoric.
Pushing anti-vaxx rhetoric.
Being duped by #1 or #2.
Thus anybody using that “this is overblown,” type of rhetoric or anything adjacent to it or similar to it, should be understood to be in group #1 or #2 and their content should not be pushed out to others, lest the person pushing the content out also join group #1 or #2.
And if you found a way to use the data to extrapolate out some sort of weird climate denial point about the frequency of snow causing bus delays, you’d be a climate denier.
Numbers are just numbers, but people can use them to mislead by adding misleading context, even if the underlying numbers are accurate.
Some people misrepresent statistics to suit their end game? I am aware of this phenomenom.
US is ‘half full’ of anti-vaxxers - not a concern of the UK government or the National Office of Statistics but I’ll be sure to let them know not to be open and transparent next time, eh.
You sure you guys aren’t just deflecting from the CDC stats showing that prior infection with no vax means you’re less likely to hospitalised / die than a vaxxed person without prior infection? Now that is irresponsible to publish, especially in the US.
The UK have to answer FOI requests. The CDC didn’t need to publish that.
John Campbell has pitched ivermectin ending a covid wave in Japan without evidence, amplified a shady research paper dicussing mRNA vaccines causing heart attacks, and now has a video saying the deaths from “just COVID” are much lower than previously believed. I can come to a pretty good conclusion about what this guy is about, theres a lot of smoke here. It isnt just reporting the news on an FOI request (the FOI request almost certainly has an implied question too).
This isnt some UK vs. USA thing churchill. The CDC certainly has its own issues, but this John Campbell guy is bad news in an actually dangerous way.
I don’t dispute that one bit. You have made it quite obvious that you are aware of the phenomenon of people misrepresenting statistics or information to suit their end game by sharing their content with us.
This guy you have referred to endearingly as Dr. John, who by the way, is not a medical doctor, has: promoted the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19, suggested that a finding that mRNA vaccines cause heart problems could be “incredibly significant” and left the video up even after anti-vaxxers started using it to push their agenda, and he has said that deaths caused by COVID “may be way lower than anyone had thought.”
Smear transmission may be a thing with Omicron, but in the context of my post I was referring to 2020 and basically the combination of not having to worry about smear and having N95’s be extremely effective would combine to make it pretty easy to take personal precautions by the 2020 standards of Unstuck.
First of all, I was one of the first people on this forum to criticize the CDC over pandemic response, and I took some heat for it, but was proven correct.
Second, this isn’t exactly the rah-rah GO USA GO WE’RE THE BEST forum. I don’t think most of us here are racing to defend the US on any accusation, usually we’re trashing our healthcare system, political system, corporations, etc.
Again you are taking data and making a misleading statement using it. That is only accounting for the people who survived prior infection, which when added back in would make the unvaccinated WAY more likely to be hospitalized/die than the vaccinated. Your statement is really just saying that if you dodge the first bullet, you’re in good position for the second.
