New report released: WTC 7 was not destroyed by fire on 9/11/2001


Latest News Forums Discussion Forum New report released: WTC 7 was not destroyed by fire on 9/11/2001

Viewing 25 posts - 126 through 150 (of 425 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #51674 Reply
    Node

      Node’s alleged conspiracy here expands beyond reasonable limit, to include swathes of scientists in multiple fields knowingly submitting and peer-reviewing fraudulent papers, huge numbers of doctors and medical staff claiming that their hospitals are overloaded five to twenty times beyond their usual capacity, vast numbers of employees in scores of national and hundreds of local governments knowingly inflating statistics, entire staffs of local newspapers in multiple countries suddenly printing twenty times more obituaries than they normally would, mayors and priests of small towns in Italy, on and on and on, countless thousands of ordinary people who usually just do their jobs but who now suddenly start acting like CIA officers on a mission.

      Straw man nonsense.

      #51676 Reply
      SA

        Node
        “Coronavirus is a flu virus.”
        I know know why Clark and I are banging against a brick wall. I we are using Flu as shorthand for Influenza. These are distinct viruses, the ones that cause more serious disease are called Influenza A and B viruses. But Flu is a lay term which people use loosely to mean mostly an upper respiratory tract infection, a common cold, to a severe illness ending in secondary bacterial bronchopneumonia. It is a loose lay term. Human corona viruses usually cause the mild end of the spectrum but the ones of concern do not even cause ‘flu’ in the common sense, but SARS-cov of 2003 caused SARS, MERS, a corona virus from camels caused another outbreak in the ME in 2012. The pattern of disease is different. If we cannot agree on these basic facts which are not really in dispute, then we cannot conduct any meaningful discussion.
        I notice you suddenly had a huff, accusing me of something I didn’t do. Do you are trying to create a hostile atmosphere.Also of course I know that Cholera is caused by a bacterium vibrio cholerae but was talking about why something can cause a contained ‘outbreak’ but has in the past caused a ‘pandemic’ but the point was lost. I can continue but I won’t until we establish a common ground for botbasic nomenclature.

        #51678 Reply
        SA

          I now know the cause of the huff it is this statement:
          “I am afraid this is a rather strange statement, so the health service decided to believe the rumours that there was an extraordinary pandemic, and admitted patients that did not need treatment, thereby overwhelming the service? You obviously have never been near a hospital in your life. ”
          I do apologise, there is a note of sarcasm but this was triggered by your statement :
          “Our health services have prioritised a routine problem – vulnerable people catching flu – and thrown far more resources than they would do normally at every case. That is why the services are overwhelmed.”
          And this is the root of the problem, denial that this is not an extraordinary infection, but a routine -vulnerable people catching flu. This is not just plain wrong, it is insensitive, and I am sorry if this upsets you. The meaning of what you say here is that if elderly and vulnerable people get serious complications of Flu (even though this is also a mistaken belief, because they have covid-19 and not just flu) then they should not be admitted to hospital and resources wasted on them. Please look again at what you said and convince me that that is not really what you meant.
          The reason why this is important for me and also it seems for Clark, to debunk such talk is that frankly it is extremely harmful in many ways. It underplays a major crisis by trying to belittle the risks and undermining all the efforts of medical people and scientists as being in cahoots with governments to hoodwink us. It also means that genuine criticisms that should be directed at governments for inaction and slow inadequate responses are deflected. It discredits individuals who may have genuine concerns about the economic consequences and you voice will be lost.

          #51679 Reply
          SA

            Clark @ April 13, 2020 at 00:27
            Yes I am afraid I can be accused of both pedantry and ignorance in my use of the term ‘Conspiracy Theory’. This is partly because I would like words to have a meaning and partly to resist the CIA and Wikipedia from defining how we use language.
            And this and also as in the case of the use of the word ‘Flu’ is where misunderstandings occur and terms need disambiguation. So for me a conspiracy theory is how it is defined by Wiktionary

            Noun[edit]
            conspiracy theory (plural conspiracy theories)
            A hypothesis alleging that the members of a coordinated group are, and/or were, secretly working together to commit illegal or wrongful actions including attempting to hide the existence of the group and its activities. In notable cases the hypothesis contradicts the mainstream explanation for historical or current events. [1960s] quotations ▼
            (dismissive, derogatory) Hypothetical speculation that is commonly considered untrue or outlandish. quotations ▼
            Usage notes[edit]
            The phrase conspiracy theory is sometimes used in an attempt to imply that hypothetical speculation is not worthy of serious consideration, usually with phrasing indicative of dismissal (e.g., “just a conspiracy theory”). However, any particular instance of use is not necessarily pejorative. Some consider it inappropriate to use the phrase “conspiracy theory” in an attempt to dismissively discredit hypothetical speculation in any form.

            This is the meaning sensu lato SL, in the broadest sense. But then the more narrow definition as found in Wikipedia is the one commonly used now which is
            to search
            For other uses, see Conspiracy theory (disambiguation).

            A conspiracy theory is an explanation of an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy by sinister and powerful actors, often political in motivation,[2][3] when other explanations are more probable.[4] The term has a pejorative connotation, implying that the appeal to a conspiracy is based on prejudice or insufficient evidence.[5] Conspiracy theories resist falsification and are reinforced by circular reasoning: both evidence against the conspiracy and an absence of evidence for it are re-interpreted as evidence of its truth,[5][6] whereby the conspiracy becomes a matter of faith rather than something that can be proved or disproved.[7][8]

            So for disambiguation Conspiracy theory SL is what I mean when I use the term, but you use it in the Conspiracy Theory Wikipedia sense. The reason why I like to distinguish these is simply that conspiracies abound and to start to debunk them you start to have a hypothesis as to who benefits and slowly work through this thought process. Sometimes you find a smoking gun, but often this remains hidden. So to give some examples , Craig Murray our host has developed a theory that there is an establishment conspiracy to discredit Alex Salmond. He stated this hypothesis and is slowly accumulating evidence that this is the case and for some this is clearly the case, but for others this remains a conspiracy theory (SL). This will unfortunately remain the case until a real smoking gun is found, at least in the MSM and by inference, the public eye. Another example is the Iraq War. The conspiracy theory there was that the Governments of the US and UK conspired to aggressively invade the sovereignty of an independent nation under a false pretence. This particular conspiracy theory was confirmed through many channels and evidence produced, not that it made a difference.
            A current conspiracy theory is that the 2019 elections in UK was rigged through postal vote fiddling (see discussion forum on this blog) and there are pieces of suggestive facts but it would need a very large coordinated effort to prove that this is the case, but for some it will remain a conspiracy theory.
            But the reason for me cutting slack is that we must try and break the Conspiracy Theories (Wikipedia) without alienation if possible. Of course there are serious questions about 911 and there are some outlandish allegations, but sometimes grouping all these under the CIA/Wikipedia definition does not do justice to some who still hold a degree of scepticism especially about how all of it was mishandled.

            #51681 Reply
            SA

              Clark @ April 13, 2020 at 01:17
              Yes of course but what I should have said is that there are three instances where Node has made unsubstantiated allegations to prove his theories. This is important as it starts to dissect the common arguments used by the ‘denialists’. I use this term despite its limitations as a short hand. There is one website that has been scouring the internet to cherry pick some of these arguments.
              1. That Covid-19 is just another ‘flu’. My answer and yours shows the basic play on a slang term to define somewhat more complex different clin9cal conditions.
              2. Ascribing the overwhelming of hospitals in many different countries to a panic response causing more panic, rather than accepting that this is extraordinary. Implying that hospital staff are unthinking and do not know what they are doing, and that the writer knows better.
              3. Latching on to the fact that many deaths are in a vulnerable population, thereby using an obvious fact of life, death occurs in those more vulnerable for whatever cause, to deflect from the fact that these deaths are untimely and occur in a very short timescale.
              4. That the numbers of deaths are exaggerated, ignoring the fact that actually they are probably underreported because of limited testing especially of people dying untested outside of hospital setting.

              It is a pity that these same people have not been able to criticise the woefully inadequate preparation for an epidemic and have mismanaged every step of the response.

              #51684 Reply
              Dave

                @ SA

                There is a conflation between corona-viruses and flu, but by your own admission corona is less severe.

                There are over 600,000 deaths a year in UK, and even if we accept the latest figure of 10,000 ‘corona-related deaths’, this still leaves 590,000 ‘non-corona-related’ deaths a year. So is it rational to impose a lockdown due to the 10,000 and not the 590,000?

                However according the “Office of National Statistics, weekly all-cause mortality surveillance 2019 to 2020” the overall death rate this year is below the average for the preceding 5 years.

                But as is revealed by the use of the words died with, after and now related, as opposed died FROM corona there is a deliberate misuse of words to artificially increase the ‘corona death figures’.

                There is also a policy to heighten the apparent severity of the disease, by the severity of the restrictions (which make no sense) to tackle it, such as stay at home, when going out is better for general health and well-being. And the lockdown hasn’t saved lives, but will cost many lives and livelihoods.

                The other undeclared (real) reason for the severe measures is to impose a ban on political meetings and assembly to stop people protesting against the criminal lockdown under fear of arrest, under the guise of protecting the people from a virus.

                The purpose of the deep state MSM driven panic is to wreck the economy and blame Trump for mishandling their crisis. This shows the satanic nature of the deep state, ready to crush humanity to defend the 1%. And shows why Sanders supporters and socialists should switch to Trump who despite his faults is a threat to the Washington swamp and preferable to the Mafia/Democrats.

                Trump initially and correctly identified this, and wanted like Boris (and Sweden) a proportionate response, but due to the wall to wall MSM scaremongering calling for a extreme lockdown, had to outflank the plot with some lockdown measures and (got to laugh) turned it to his advantage with daily Whitehouse briefing that have boosted his popularity.

                And the difference this time compared to for example 9/11 is this lockdown hurts everyone to varying degrees, (except the 1%) but because its dressed up as a medical matter there is already massive debunking, as many people naively reveal the truth, not aware of the political agenda behind the crisis.

                #51685 Reply
                Node

                  SA “No I do not believe the numbers are exaggerated.”

                  Italy does not differentiate between those who simply have the virus in their body, and those who are actually killed by it. Professor Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s minister of health said:

                  The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus […] On re-evaluation by the National Institute of Health, only 12 per cent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus, while 88 per cent of patients who have died have at least one pre-morbidity – many had two or three,”

                  Robert Koch Institute confirmed that Germany counts any deceased person who was infected with coronavirus as a Covid19 death, whether or not it actually caused death.
                  In Heinsberg, for example, a 78-year-old man with previous illnesses died of heart failure, and that was without Sars-2 lung involvement. Since he was infected, he naturally appears in the Covid 19 statistics.

                  In the USA, Minnesota State Senator Dr Scott Jensen says Department of Health guidelines instruct doctors to list Covid19 as cause of death, without being tested. He said he had never before in his thirty-five-year career received specific instructions on how to fill out a death certificate.

                  In the UK, Northern Ireland’s HSC Public Health Agency is releasing weekly surveillance bulletins on the pandemic, in those reports they define a “Covid19 death” as:

                  “individuals who have died within 28 days of first positive result, whether or not COVID-19 was the cause of death.”

                  NHS England’s Office of National Statistics change the way they report the numbers in weekly reports on nation-wide mortality. They now report the same deaths twice – once in provisional totals and again the following week when the death has been registered. ONS tell doctors it is OK to list “Covid-19” as a cause of death when there is literally no evidence the deceased was infected. That means there are potentially huge numbers of “Covid19 deaths” that were never even tested for the disease. NHS guidance is “if before death the patient had symptoms typical of COVID-19 infection, but the test result has not been received, it would be satisfactory to give ‘COVID-19’ as the cause of death, tick Box B and then share the test result when it becomes available. In the circumstances of there being no swab, it is satisfactory to apply clinical judgement.”

                  The Coronavirus Bill has altered the law such that the true figures can never be known. “Usually, any death attributed to a “notifiable disease” had to be referred to a coroner for a jury hearing. Under UK law Covid19 is a “notifiable disease”, but the new Coronavirus Bill alters the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, to specifically exempt alleged Covid19 deaths from jury inquests. Further, according to the office of the Chief Coroner, the Coronavirus Bill means that these deaths don’t have to be referred to a coroner at all, and that medical practitioners can sign off a cause of death for a body they have never even seen. [….] Deaths “in the community” can be listed as Covid19 deaths without being tested for the disease, or even seen by a doctor at all These deaths will not necessarily be referred to a coroner, and certainly not heard by a jury.”

                  A typical example : An 18-year-old in Coventry tested positive for coronavirus the day before he died and was reported as its youngest victim at the time. But the hospital subsequently released a statement saying his death had been due to a separate “significant” health condition and not connected to the virus. Despite the hospital specifically informing the press that the death was unconnected to coronavirus, the case is still being reported as the youngest coronavirus victim.

                  #51686 Reply
                  Node

                    I forgot to add the link for N. Ireland definition of covid-19 death: “individuals who have died within 28 days of first positive result, whether or not COVID-19 was the cause of death.

                    ”https://www.hiddensyria.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/COVID-19-Survellance-Bulletin-02.04.20.pdf

                    [pretty weird link but the document seems to be genuine]

                    #51687 Reply
                    SA

                      Dave
                      “There is a conflation between corona-viruses and flu, but by your own admission corona is less severe.”
                      There is only conflation in certain people’s minds. So as not to repeat myself look up what I wrote earlier:
                      April 13, 2020 at 05:00
                      #51676.
                      There is a spectrum of disease caused by SARS-Cov2 which includes SARS at the severe end and mild or asymptomatic disease. The proportions of each of these is still not known because we do not have a denominator because of the lack of widespread testing. SARS is not a feature of infection with influenza viruses so to keep on repeating the same thing is just wrong. Once again let me repeat: Influenza and Covid-19 are two different diseases.
                      Your use of statistics is fallacious:

                      “There are over 600,000 deaths a year in UK, and even if we accept the latest figure of 10,000 ‘corona-related deaths’, this still leaves 590,000 ‘non-corona-related’ deaths a year. So is it rational to impose a lockdown due to the 10,000 and not the 590,000? ”
                      So because 600,000 people died last year we accept that this figure will be fixed despite having a pandemic? What sort of logic is that? The 600,000 people died over 12 months roughly about 1250 people a day. The figures of increasing mortality from Covid-19 have only recently started to reach high figures getting just over 1000 a few days ago. Therefore fixing your figure for Covid-19 deaths to 10,000 and assuming no one is going to die of the disease for the rest of the year is a bit premature.
                      You think that your hero Trump will save us if only he is allowed to? Remember he has been around now for 3 and a half years, and things are only getting worse. The US is no less a gangster state than it has been under other POTUSs.

                      #51689 Reply
                      SA

                        Node
                        I do take your point but a lot of what you are saying boils down to two points:
                        1. That everyone who has been found to have the virus and died has been labelled as dying of the virus. Valid point but what happens in a situation like this is that there are thorough clinical studies as those published in the Lancet and JAMA by the Chinese groups which detail the clinical picture, and then what happens in the real world with limited resources and fast moving scenarios. It is easy to document two parameters: those who are positive for SARS cov-2, because testing is centralised and data available immediately and a great deal of accuracy, and those who have died because again that is an easily verifiable occurrence. But the clinical details of what the actual cause of death such as is registered in death certificates may not be as easily collectable and collatable in this situation. This is my own analysis and I may be wrong but this would explain the wordings of some of the pronouncements made. Because of what was seen in China and Italy and Spain, you cannot afford the luxury of waiting for 100% proof data. In any case why are people dying in these numbers whatever the cause of death is? It may be more instructive to look at the weekly mortality figures from the ONS but even these lag by about two weeks. The latest available figures are from 27th March at the start of the sudden rise in cases.
                        2. Reliance on anecdotes of certain misdiagnoses that achieve a high profile and become the exceptions to prove the case, The Slough girl is a case in point, and so is the German patient who died of heart failure. But nobody seems concerned about many residents in care homes dying of what appears to be covid-19 but remained untested.
                        Yes there may be inaccuracies and confusion in specific cases but can we really get away from acknowledging that many people not expected to die are dying and very quickly and in large increasing numbers?

                        #51690 Reply
                        Node

                          Italy’s Ministry of Health calculated that their method of registering covid 19 deaths overstated the number of people dying of cornonavirus (as opposed to with it) by a factor of 8.5. They were so concerned about the false impression the figures were giving that they called a press conference to clarify the situation. The only paper in Britain that reported it was the Daily Telegraph).

                          Britain and the USA are using the same flawed method of counting coronavirus deaths but with the additional instructions that deaths should be included even if no test was done, and if the death was ‘in the community’ coronavirus should be presumed to be responsible.

                          In the light of Italy’s analysis, and the additional inflationary factors present in UK’s system, we can conservatively assume that UK’s coronavirus death figures are exaggerated by considerably more than 10 times. We may also assume that the UK is aware of the statement by Italy’s Ministry of Health.

                          So I repeat my question : Do you believe the figures released as coronavirus deaths in the UK and many other countries, including the ones you mentioned – Italy, Spain, Germany, the USA – are deliberately and hugely exaggerated?

                          #51692 Reply
                          Dave

                            @ SA

                            There is a conflation because they are similar and the preventative measures are similar, albeit there is no actual defence to a microscopic virus as opposed treatment for the symptoms.

                            The focus of the lockdown has been on the healthy public and economy, rather than on those most at risk, hence the on-going fatalities. And so its wreck a healthy economy and civil rights policy under guise of fighting a virus policy.

                            Within the 600,000 are victims of infections caught in hospitals and care homes are underfunded/mismanaged and inmates are sometimes mistreated. In other words there are many areas deserving better attention and funding, which in turn require a healthy economy to deliver.

                            Therefore to wreck an economy to ‘help’ a particular group (and failing to do so) is at best sincere but counter-productive, but as its so obviously an irrational approach based on dodgy figures, its just wicked really. But for those who gave us 9/11 and “humanitarian destruction of defenceless countries to save lives”, its just the day job!

                            #51693 Reply
                            SA

                              This is from the Italian public health centre, equivalent to PHE here and with actual analysis of causes of death:
                              https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/sars-cov-2-decessi-italia#4
                              It is worth quoting the first 6 headings:
                              1. Sample
                              The analysis is based on a sample of 16,654 patients who died and tested positive for COVID-19 in Italy.
                              2. Demographics
                              The average age of patients who died and tested positive for COVID-19 is 78 years (median 80, range 5-100, Range InterQuartile – IQR 73-85). There are 5478 women (32.9%). Figure 1 shows that the median age of COVID-19-positive patients is over 15 years higher than that of patients who contracted the infection (median age: patients who died 80 years – patients with infection 62 years). Age data was not available for 1 patient. The figure shows the number of deaths by age group. Women who died after contracting SARS-CoV-2 infection are older than men (median age: women 83 – men 78).
                              3. Pre-existing pathologies
                              The graph presents the most common pre-existing chronic diseases (diagnosed before contracting SARS-CoV-2 infection) in deceased patients. This figure was obtained from 1453 deceased people for whom medical records could be analysed. The average number of pathologies observed in this population is 3.3 (median 3, Standard Deviation 1.9). Overall, 51 patients (3.5% of the sample) had 0 pathologies, 215 (14.8%) 1 pathology, 301 had 2 pathologies (20.7%) 886 (61.0%) had three or more pathologies. Prior to hospitalization, 25% of COVID-19 positive patients had ACE-inhibitors and 15% had therapy with Sartani (angiotensin receptor blockers). In women (n-448) the average number of diseases observed is 3.3 (median 3, Standard Deviation 1.9); in men (n-1005) the average number of pathologies observed is 3.2 (median 3, Standard Deviation 1.9). standard deviation 1.9).
                              4. Diagnosis of hospitalization
                              93.5% of hospitalisation diagnoses mention coVID-19-compatible conditions (e.g. pneumonia, respiratory failure) or symptoms (e.g. fever, breathlessness, cough). In 91 cases (6.5% of the total) the diagnosis of hospitalization was not related to the infection. In 8 cases the diagnosis of hospitalization concerned only cancer diseases, in 40 cases cardiovascular pathologies (e.g. acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke), in 13 cases gastrointestinal diseases (e.g. gallbladder, intestinal perforation, intestinal occlusion, cirrhosis), in 30 other cases.
                              5. Symptoms
                              The graph shows the most commonly observed symptoms before hospitalization in COVID-19 positive patients. Breath and cough fever are the most common symptoms. Less frequent are diarrhea and emotic. 5.7% of people had no symptoms at the time of admission.
                              6. Complications
                              Respiratory failure was the most commonly observed complication in this sample (96.7% of cases), followed by acute kidney damage (23.5%), overinfection (11.0%) acute myocardial damage (9.8%).

                              Not that in this sample of over 16,000 deaths 96.7% died of respiratory failure and this is much harder data than the anecdotes you quote.

                              #51694 Reply
                              SA

                                Dave
                                Let us concede for the sake of argument that you are right. Why are all those capitalists trying to wreck the capitalist economy? Could you tell me in easily verifiable terms how they stand to gain? Also how do you explain this rising death toll suddenly arising in many countries, escalating exponentially with a repeated pattern?

                                #51695 Reply
                                SA

                                  And Node
                                  “So I repeat my question : Do you believe the figures released as coronavirus deaths in the UK and many other countries, including the ones you mentioned – Italy, Spain, Germany, the USA – are deliberately and hugely exaggerated?”

                                  But I have already answered this question in the negative if you would like to go back and have a look. You started answering that post above but on your own admission decided to abandon reading further because your feelings were hurt.

                                  #51696 Reply
                                  Node

                                    @ SA

                                    I have provided evidence that the system the UK uses inflates the figures by a factor of 8.5, and that the UK has introduced additional inflationary counting methods.

                                    I have made a reasonable assumption that the UK is aware of the above.

                                    On what grounds do you dispute that the UK is deliberately inflating its coronavirus death figures?

                                    #51700 Reply
                                    SA

                                      Node
                                      You stated that the figures were inflated but did not provide any evidence.

                                      #51701 Reply
                                      Dave

                                        @ SA

                                        Rather than Capitalists, think modern day Alchemists, the Bankers, who have found the secret of turning lead into gold, through the private control of money creation, a privilege they could lose if either left or right wing populists win power and restore this power to the people. As ironically could happen as governments increase spending using Modern Monetary Theory, to respond to the crisis.

                                        A privilege guarded by an electric fence called “anti-Semitism”, hence why both left and right get reviled by the private alchemists, unless they agree to toe the line. Corrupt or compromised politicians normally do, but independent thinkers do occasionally appear and are deemed extremely dangerous, in case they (even innocently) act on behalf of the people.

                                        For example Corbyn and Trump are polar opposites and revile each other, but are both equally reviled by the money power. They got rid of Corbyn, but Trump is proving popular and tenacious, hence why they have had to up-the-anti to get rid of him, bearing in mind a recession ultimately favours the rich, who can buy assets cheap and ‘double-their-money’ when the economy is reflated.

                                        And bearing in mind wrecking the economy is still not as bad as starting another world war to maintain their financial empire.

                                        #51702 Reply
                                        Dave

                                          @ SA

                                          The evidence for inflated figures is the use of the words WITH, AFTER and RELATED rather than FROM to describe the coronavirus death figures.

                                          #51703 Reply
                                          SA

                                            Just a slight problem with your analysis Dave.
                                            Trump is part of those rich people you are talking about which you say he stands up against. Trump is hardly anti-Semitic or anti-Israeli. If you think he is whilst having recognised Israel’s right to annex territories and to own Jerusalem, whilst his son in law produces a one-sided deal of the century, then something doesn’t add up..

                                            #51704 Reply
                                            SA

                                              Are you quoting from any particular document? If so please reference so I can analyse.

                                              #51705 Reply
                                              Node

                                                SA “You stated that the figures were inflated but did not provide any evidence.”

                                                I provided a statement from the Italian Institute of Health that only 12% of Italy’s reported Covid19 deaths actually listed Covid19 as the cause of death.
                                                I provided links to Office of National Statistics and NHS documents which prove that the UK is using the same flawed reporting system as Italy.
                                                I provided further UK Office of the Chief Coroner documents that prove the UK has introduced further reporting measures – such as including those who have not been tested, and even those who have not been seen by a doctor – which inflate the figures even more than Italy.

                                                Do you dispute the validity any of this evidence?

                                                #51708 Reply
                                                Clark

                                                  It is likely that the changes in counting death statistics are because covid-19 deaths were being undercounted. This happened earlier in China. At first, deaths were only recorded as due to covid-19 if a test had proven positive, but far larger numbers were dying than being tested. So the criteria were altered to include clinical judgement based on symptoms, especially lung scans, because covid-19 produces characteristic lung damage.

                                                  There is also evidence of undercounting from Italy:

                                                  Google translated

                                                  https://www.ecodibergamo.it/stories/bergamo-citta/coronavirus-the-real-death-tool-4500-victims-in-one-month-in-the-province-of_1347414_11/

                                                  – Coronavirus, the real death toll: 4,500 victims in one month in the province of Bergamo

                                                  – This is the result of the analysis carried out by L’Eco di Bergamo and InTwig using the data provided by local municipalities.

                                                  – What the official figures don’t say. They don’t say that in March 2020 more than 5,400 people have died in Bergamo province, 4,500 of which due to coronavirus. Six times more than the previous year. Of only 2,060 of them, the official certified deaths caused by Covid-19 in the local hospitals (data as at yesterday), we know everything: age, gender, pre-existing conditions. We do not know anything about the other 2,500. Many of them are old people, who died at home or in assisted residential homes. In spite of the unmistakable symptoms, as recorded by physicians and relatives, they were never tested for the disease. On their death certificate you can just read: interstitial pneumonia.

                                                  Bergamo Province has a population of about 1.1 million people.
                                                  – – – – – – – –

                                                  Node has already seen this evidence elsewhere, but continues to tell only one side of a story. It is possible that Node is knowingly making a false case.

                                                  #51709 Reply
                                                  Clark

                                                    Is that right Dave? We are prevented from criticising banking practices because it would be anti-Semitic?

                                                    #51711 Reply
                                                    michael norton

                                                      Apparently in the United Kingdom
                                                      not a single person taken in to hospital suspected of having covid-19 has been counted as recovered, not even Boris Johnson.
                                                      Yet in other European countries, they claim thousands have recovered.
                                                      In Germany they are claiming 50% have recovered.

                                                      Surely things can’t be so different between Germany and the U.K.?
                                                      https://coronavirus.thebaselab.com/

                                                    Viewing 25 posts - 126 through 150 (of 425 total)
                                                    Reply To: New report released: WTC 7 was not destroyed by fire on 9/11/2001
                                                    Your information: