Corona Virus Treatment

They're open round here. My sister had a partial filling and a scale and polish.

 

Boris Johnson and Matt Hancock

 

That's the problem with being obsessed by the numbers they post up.

Shineyland has a zero infection rate and none within a mile of us. Of course, I haven't asked any of the wildlife round here

 

You can have all the graphs, numbers, heat charts and data you like (be that accredited or not), there are a few simple facts that seem to be conveniently bypassed:

This is the time of year for all respiratory viruses, one of the worst and most widely spread being influenza, yet the numbers of flu cases has fallen off a cliff this year - why?

Why were we comfortable with circa 30k people dying from flu in 2018, yet we are not comfortable with numbers slightly higher (in terms of percentage of population) for C19?

If masks and social distancing are not working, why are we doing them?

Lockdown clearly isn't a lockdown at all (traffic levels are virtually the same around here) so why are we bothering with it? If you agree that we should lockdown, then would it not have been more sensible to over-stock and over prepare everyone and then shut everything (literally everything) down for four weeks?

The entire concept of science, as far as I understand it, is that learned individuals can offer their ideas and opinions, yet there are many highly qualified people who are being roundly ignored here - why?

The accuracy of the testing has been admitted to be less than great, yet we are happy to have our lives destroyed based on that dodgy data - why?

What is the current death rate versus the average for this time of year?

Why do we inflate C19 fatalities by counting deaths of people who have died 'with' Covid rather than 'from' Covid?

Many of us know people who have been tested, yet were entirely asymptomatic - firstly, why get tested if there is nothing wrong with you, and secondly what benefit has that had when Test & Trace has all the reliability of a Hermes courier?

Why are we comfortable spending millions, possibly billions, on testing people who are most likely negative but could then become infected the very following day? Would that money not be better spent on treatment of the actual cases that need it, and on proper social care for the elderly and vulnerable to keep them out of hospitals in the first place, not least given the rate of infections that appear in hospital?

Regarding the vaccine, why are we comfortable that the pharma companies have been fully absolved of any risk in terms of lawsuits if it subsequently proves to injure or harm people? Are the physicians themselves going to be personally liable (because I will be asking the question of my GP before even considering it), especially given the short development and testing phase. Oh, and please don't give me the 'experts' and 'accredited' line, as I have personal experience of them getting things wrong on a massive scale, and more than once.

There are so many other questions like this that should be being asked and answered, but instead we seem to have gone into a tailspin where we will believe any old rubbish that BBC or Sky choose to send down to our TV screens.

 

I don't believe the numbers attributed to coronavirus. I know it's only one example but someone I know had a bad blood clot in the leg, ambulance was called but the First Responder arrived within two minutes and whilst waiting for the ambulance did a coronavirus test (which turned out to be negative). Ambulance was there within 15 minutes and he was rushed to the hospital. Three days later he died from an embolism (the blood clot moved) but coronavirus was put on the death certificate. Even the medical staff that attended him were shocked by it.

The family are trying to get it altered but I don't think they stand a chance!

 

Perhaps the site has resigned