reminds me more than anything of Jim Jones in the 60's or 70's - Google him youngsters. Instead of Jim, read Media.They tell us what to do (as Jim Jones did to 1000 followers). We do it. Superficiality rolls. Belief in media stories tools. Lemmings do as they are told without question. The parallel is astonishing.

Jonestown such an important part of modern history. Jim started the church for good intentions there was no segregation in his church. Then became a paranoid, power crazed loon.

I can see it with Boris Johnson "take the vaccine" if you don't there be sheeple telling you they have taken the shot -
probably shaming strangers who haven't or not keeping distances.

It probably be a placebo shot anyway.


I had the record album made by the Peoples Temple, it's is actually well produced and mixed. Both time me and money definitely went in to making it.

JK2006 wrote:
Belief in media stories tools

Only when creditable organisations like the WHO confirm the data

Like the USA has a quarter of worldwide covid infections, and deaths

In just 6 months in every state - the media report the data received, usually correctly...

Barney wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
Belief in media stories tools

Only when creditable organisations like the WHO confirm the data

Like the USA has a quarter of worldwide covid infections, and deaths

In just 6 months in every state - the media report the data received, usually correctly...





Barney it is all in how the stats are presented not that they are not stats. You don't seriously think that media communication is somehow neutral or objective surely!!!?

Why is this not headline news? It is a pan country analysis of Covid published in The Lancet (not notable as a journal for "conspiracy theorists").

Its conclusions are devastating: that the full lockdown we have persued with all the economic and human misery arising, was futile.

Quote: "...goverment actions such as border closures, full lockdowns, and a high rate of Covid 19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality."

And: "full lockdowns and widespread Covid 19 testing were not associated with reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality."

What the report concludes is that common sense measures such as hand washing, social distancing and protecting the vulnerable at the right point, are what makes the difference.

What some have mistaken for "common sense" is the idea that if we are all locked down then it must stop loads of deaths...right?

Wrong.

The strongest emerging evidence is showing that this concept has no science to back it up.

The report is dense and technical but do read the conclusions and then ponder if - just maybe - our responses to this horrible virus have been driven by media scare-mongering and hapless politicians rather than "the science".

www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30208-X/fulltext

PS Barney WHO data on death numbers has bugger all to do with the above....

Best analysis in ages wyot - better than my own! Thank you.

Can you please put up a new link as the one supplied doesn't appear to be working. I'm amazed at the conclusions you quote and if correct I agree they deserve a wider readership

I, too, would be glad to see The Lancet analysis.

Lockdowns were futile?

Oh yes; sadly there will always be the gullible justifying believing the media and ignoring the truth. Covid19 is NOT the plague inflated by media and enhanced by stupid governments.

www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jul/23...covid-deaths-lancet/

www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31601-9/fulltext

www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30208-X/fulltext

www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30201-7/fulltext

The direct quote in the Washington Times from The Lancet (unless it's a hoax)... “Government actions such as border closures, full lockdowns, and a high rate of COVID-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality.”

It does seem difficult to access The Lancet via links - see if you can get today's latest.

www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31641-X/fulltext

Links 2,3 and 4 don't seem to work.

The one that does confirms the study as one from 4 scientists from 3 countries - which seems less than conclusive.

Grey areas continue to exist - but the coranovirus obese/affluent category would explain the high levels of US infections.

JK2006 wrote:
“Government actions such as border closures, full lockdowns, and a high rate of COVID-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality.”

Are not these very actions the reason we now have less infections and fewer deaths - in numerous countries - including here?

Yes sorry all that links to The Lancet article don't seem to work. But as you can see from JK's other links it is now gaining media traction.

I am sure the findings can be critiqued. This is not an attempt at a "gotcha" moment.

But what is positive is that at long last an actual debate can be had based on evidential analysis rather than discredited forecasting models and media manipulation.

Who knows maybe this will even be - ironically - the next big media story!

It is after all (and tragically) a GREAT story that all the ruin and deaths to come due to our lockdown didn't need to happen.

We shall await here with interest...

I cannot say reasons Barney, BB and others; I have no knowledge at all. I add I also have no medical training whatsoever. All I do have is enormous experience of the media and I know they exaggerate and inflate everything (as do false accusers, police and lawyers). And common sense.

When this trivial virus started in Wuhan I examined the printed details and guessed - whether accurate or not - this could be nasty to me. I'm elderly and diabetic.

So I bought a mask (common sense told me it might make a small difference despite media & government calling them "worse than useless").

As it unfolded (and I self isolated) it seemed sensible in order to avoid catching it though I thought (and still believe) I got it in early March.

Like mild flu only with incredible hot night time fevers.

4-5 days of bed, paracetamol and liquid and I was right as rain.

Then watching the media panic so swiftly followed by global governmental panic, I concluded this was VERY infectious but only limited lethal.

I suspect things like lockdowns, testing and tracing might slightly lower the infection rate but do no more than have a tiny effect on the death count. Common sense, hygiene and, most of all, protecting and treating those in care homes, hospitals, prisons and refugee camps was the most vital need.

These finding, if correct, seem to confirm my theory.

Barney wrote:
Links 2,3 and 4 don't seem to work.

The one that does confirms the study as one from 4 scientists from 3 countries - which seems less than conclusive.

Grey areas continue to exist - but the coranovirus obese/affluent category would explain the high levels of US infections.




Barney yes it was 4 scientists from 3 countries but they came to their conclusions by analysing data from 50 countries.

Don't do what the Media do!

As I say I am sure this can be critiqued but let's be precise before pinging back to the confort zone...?

And as we happily get more specific (and to challenge my comfort zone that the lockdown was a nonsense) where is the data anywhere proving that the UK response has saved significant numbers of lives?