by John Ward
Public Health England has long been on my list of Common Purpose nests in dire need of cuckoo ejection. Now it seems Health Secretary Matt Hancock has ordered an urgent review into how they compile their Covid19 records.
Last weekend, I posted ‘Ten Questions’ the media should ask about virus anomolies.The basis for them I defined as follows:
‘exemplification by the use of unanswered questions about the mismatch between official narratives and the objective data’.
One of the questions was put as follows: ‘Would you like to explain to us please why numerous medical professionals have testified to the falsification of death certificates – and casual assumptions that Covid19 was the cause of death among other pathogens – and yet the UK’s biggest funereal provider (the Cooperative Movement) reports “no significant rise in demand”?
The Coop’s records have since found support at the Office of National Statistics, whose data show that deaths in England and Wales are below the five-year average. Fewer than a few thousand people are in hospital with the virus, and roughly 150 cases are deemed to be “serious” . In London, new cases have been under 50 new cases, in Manchester the figure is 11 – and in the entire South West (heavily biased towards older people) case numbers have been in the single figures for over a wee.
Now Professors Yoon K Loke and Carl Heneghan have discovered a Page 1 flaw in PHE’s statistical system. It involves a ludicrous assumption that 100% of those who tested positive would die eventually.
The Daily Telegraph – which has been burrowing into the scandal – notes that:
‘It has played havoc with analysis about who is most at risk from the virus, be it by age or pre-existing condition. It also undermines our understanding of the extent of spread, hotspots and the steps required to combat the virus’.
All of that, I would contend, is true. But the MSM as always stops short of the more obvious conclusion, viz, the error is such a howler, is it really conceivable that it was entirely down to an ‘understandable error’?
All up since March this year, I have posted about more than a dozen instances of doctors, nursing staff, care home workers and NHS administrators writing to me about a general ‘policy’ of maximising Covid19 “scores”.
The Express last Friday has critics of the PHE stats observing how the PHE numbers “vary substantially from day to day. This variation is most likely due to the appearance of ‘historic’ deaths that have occurred weeks before, but for some reason unknown to us, get reported in batches on particular days. To counter this variation, a moving average smooths the trend, but even this is at odds with the ONS data…”
I day’s “surge” of 110 deaths, for example, is now thought to have been only 40.
In Haut Agenais where I reside, during June there were 11 cases – 8 were aged over 80. Two people died. On the day that the French Government brought forward the obligatory mask wearing in shops decree, there were 14 deaths in the entire country.
From the start of Covid19 achieving Pandemic status, there has been an unmistakeable pattern among the media, political and pharmaceutical classes to exaggerate, alarm – and accept every worst-case model in relation to Coronavirus.
Lockdown was used, despite the inability of any stats anywhere to suggest it might have been a succesful weapon. This was preferred to the far more sensible and low risk policy of lockdown for silvers and let the virus take its course among other age groups where the chances of death were homoaeopathic.
Now Macron – who led the charge of the ‘This is a war for survival’ brigade – bangs the table at the EU recovery summit demanding more money be found to bale him out of the idiotic economic decision he took.
Imagine submitting this narrative as a novel to publishers. I wouldn’t fancy your chances…..but the odds would be greatly improved if you asked “Cui bono?” – and then resolved the plot with reference to Big Pharma and billionaire vaccinators.
Stay tuned: Contrick19 is unravelling week by week.