principiascientificinternational--2020-10-03--Scoop: Govt Scientist Exposes COVID19 Hospital Beds Scam

The retired former government scientist I am acquainted with has been doing some crunching of numbers about how full our hospitals were and are during the Covid ‘ pandemic ’ , and this is what he found .
Most of us hold an image of the pandemic in the UK as being thousands of stricken souls being ferried to overcrowded hospitals on a daily basis .
We have the mainstream media to thank for this , along with the rawness of image pouring into our social media feeds from China and Italy .
Some dared to question the narrative after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ E departments , to be beaten down by a friend of a friend who had been working non-stop around the clock .
Working non-stop around the clock , patients waiting several hours on trolleys and empty wards due to lack of nursing staff was pretty much normal in my old inner-city teaching hospital , so the curious among us never really got to understand what was actually going on above the level of the anecdote .
Here I reveal what actually happened across all 315 service providers that make up the NHS England @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say I am surprised by what I am finding is a serious understatement .
I shall start with a slide of daily admissions of confirmed COVID-19 cases onto which I have also plotted daily diagnoses of COVID-19 arising from the testing of inpatients .
Daily figures are defined as activity in the preceding 24 hours as at 8am each morning .
Hopefully this slide speaks for itself but I realise a few words may be needed .
When I first saw this chart , my response was that I had made a serious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got the two series mixed up ; either that or my spreadsheet had mangled the figures somehow .
After triple-checking the data I can report this chart is accurate .
In a nutshell we may say that the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK has primarily been an in-hospital disease .
At the peak of the outbreak between 1st April and 10th April just over five times as many existing inpatients were diagnosed with COVID-19 as were coming in through the front door with a diagnosis of COVID-19 ( x5.35 ) .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the mainstream media .
We may now also see the reason for the confusion across social media .
At a peak intake rate of 531 admitted cases across all 315 service providers on 9th April , NHS England ’ s emergency services never got truly stretched and many A & Es would indeed have idled as some have reported , though all depends on catchment area ( my own A & E was always bursting to the seams even on a sunny day in May ) .
In contrast , some poor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the 2,582 inpatients who were discovered to be lying there with COVID-19 on 3rd April .
Hospitals were certainly busy but not with an influx of the public from the streets .
A final but important point to make is that , by definition , inpatients were in hospital for reasons other than COVID-19 ( otherwise they ’ d be classed as COVID-19 admissions ) .
This tip of a co-morbidity iceberg that is seen in terms of bed occupancy also reveals itself in mortality where we find that , of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at 26th August ) , only 1,390 were for those presenting with no pre-existing medical condition .
WHO directives to medical authorities state that death certification must show COVID-19 as cause regardless of co-morbidity , an extraordinary fact that prompted me to quip “ you can no longer die of cancer ” .
( Emphasis added ) In terms of bed occupancy , the serious end of the pandemic concerns mechanical ventilation ( MV ) bed usage .
I shall set aside arguments for and against ventilator use in the treatment of COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complicated issue .
When it comes to the crunch intensivists working within the NHS would have had no option but to place patients on ventilation if ARDS set in and their condition was deteriorating .
Mechanical ventilation will have killed some patients but then again they would have died without it , for at this stage no prophylactic such as HCQ or Ivermectin will have afforded a safe and sensible clinical strategy .
In many cases death will have been inevitable and unavoidable .
In the attached slide we get a feel for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the problem , with service providers within NHS England providing around 2,800 MV beds per day during the peak in early April .
This equates to an average of roughly 9 beds per provider , though tertiary centres will have mostly taken the strain .
Ventilation , like death , is a pretty robust indicator of what the disease has been doing and is now doing regardless of what the press and government may claim .
Effectively we are looking at a disease that has come and gone .
( Emphasis added ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other patients tells another side of the story .
In early August we see this bobbing around 2,000 – 2,500 beds per day ; we may assume this is business as usual for summer .
If 2,000 – 2,500 MV beds is business as usual we may well ask what happened to the 1,500 patients per day that must have been denied a MV bed back in April in preparation for COVID-19 .
Did this bed shunting induce excess death or is a degree of MV bed occupancy unnecessary ?
This is one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ask ; I shall put it bluntly : did NHS MV bed management kill people ?
( Emphasis added ) Another take home message from this slide is that ‘ business as usual ’ runs at 2,000 – 2,500 MV beds per day during the lean summer months whereas the peak pandemic only reached ~2,800 MV beds per day .
This is a difference of just ~300 MV beds per day across 315 service providers .
Can this really be called a pandemic ?
It will be interesting to see what happens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ winter ( assuming the PCR test fiasco permits seasonal ‘ flu ) .
Since we know the daily bed days occupied by COVID-19 cases together with the daily discharges what we can do is calculate accumulated bed days and divide this by accumulated discharges to arrive at an estimate of the average length of stay over time .
If this is a bit of an early morning head-banger let us try a worked example… Up to 31st March of this year NHS England reported 65,972 bed days that had been allocated to COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ COVID-19 cases had been discharged .
Thus , on average , their length of stay equates to 65,972 / 3,414 = 19.32 days .
Obviously , some will have recovered much quicker than this and some will have not but nevertheless we may say that , on average , the length of stay was 19.3 days .
If we repeat this for 1st April we find 78,031 beds in use up to this point and 4,264 discharges giving an average length of stay of 18.3 days .
Repeat this process and you end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of stay is a complex variable that acts as a proxy for both the condition of the patient and the effectiveness of treatment .
During the last two weeks of March we observe elevated stays of around 20 days , and this will largely reflect the generally poor condition of the first COVID-19 patients .
We noted above that the majority of cases during the early stages of the pandemic were inpatients rather than admissions .
This chart also reflects the learning curve of medical teams , and in this regard , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 14 days within the space of a fortnight .
By mid-April presenting condition and medical care had settled down into a routine which has slightly improved over time .
In the wake of reports of deaths on waiting lists – something I warned about at the outset , what we are looking at in this slide is bed occupancy for all 315 service providers that go to make up the NHS England bed pool .
As we can see from occupancy levels for the relatively ‘ normal ’ week beginning 7th August our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beds on a daily basis .
Back in April this was curtailed to 40,000 daily bed spaces per day – that ’ s a lot of missing beds and this would have translated into a great deal of pain and misery for the folk who would have used them .
If we take 100,000 beds per day as the reference for healthy service levels , then deduct occupancy for both COVID-19 and other diseases , then we see that 1,666,772 bed-days were lost across the 315 service providers since 1st April because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( in my previous article https : //principia-scientific.com/uk-govt-play-fast-loose-on-covid-data-to-justify-more-restrictions/ ) that the dramatic rise in new cases – now being called a new wave – can be largely attributed to the dramatic rise in testing by calculating the Positive Swab Rate ( PSR ) .
When this is done , we find a very modest rise and a very definite spike that can not be considered to be robust evidence of a ‘ new wave ’ ; spikes are not waves last time I looked .
However , we also noted a rise in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ admissions as such since the count includes inpatients who have been discovered to be positive during their stay .
As already noted , a positive case does not necessarily mean an infectious case and an admission with COVID-19 doesn ’ t necessarily mean an admission because of COVID-19 ; there ’ s that old chestnut ‘ of ’ and ‘ with ’ again !
At this point we may consider something may well be going on beneath the numbers despite all the additional testing and so I devised an indicator I am calling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is simply the accumulated number of daily bed days attributed to COVID-19 cases divided by the accumulated number of daily reported new cases .
If reported new cases are translating into bed use then we should see this indicator rise over time or at least remain static .
Except it doesn ’ t , it is decline .
( Emphasis added ) Attached is a plot of BOR for the period 1st June to 17th September .
What we are looking at is a nose-dive that is indicative of a pandemic in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way of saying bed use is in decline whilst reported cases are rising ; a bold and brazen clinical fact that is not commensurate with the government ’ s claims of a ‘ new wave ’ .
A new wave of just what , exactly ?
Irresponsible mass testing , perhaps ?
( Emphasis added ) If I were to put an alarmist spin on this , I ’ d claim that this is showing bed stays for COVID-19 cases are reducing because the stratum of the population the virus is now hitting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases being hit back in April .
There ’ s no evidence for this and similar claims that attempt to explain away lack of deaths , of course , but that doesn ’ t stop people waving their hands about and failing to provide evidence in support of their argument .
The good news here is that I can analyse length of stay ( LOS ) to see if this is diminishing , thus bolstering the case for alarmists .
I calculated this at a steady decline in average stay from 14.01 days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2nd September for service providers making up NHS England , this representing a 6.1 % drop in LOS .
During this exact same period BOR dropped from 3.40 beds per case on 1st June to 3.07 beds per case on 2nd September , this representing a 9.7 % drop in BOR .
We now see that shorter length of stay is indeed contributing to the situation but the net result is that BOR is still diminishing , which is indicative of a pandemic in general decline .
( Emphasis added ) The data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ occupancy project ( BOP ) from NHS England is valuable in that it reveals just who was admitted to hospital as a positive case and who was an inpatient who tested positive .
As we have recently discovered the gov.uk coronavirus dashboard calls them both ‘ admissions ’ .
The NHS England daily hospital activity file also usefully reveals bed use for COVID-19 and other patients as well as discharge counts for COVID-19 by age band but this file is only updated monthly with the last release dated 10th September .
This means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ headlines as they happen , which is rather frustrating since the data are already sitting there on NHS England ’ s servers .
This morning I have noted that NHS England are now producing another activity file – the COVID-19 daily situation report .
This sounds like it is going to be useful but it only provides data on admissions ; and there ’ s a rather cheeky twist .
Five tables are provided and I am going to list their headings to see if you can spot the cheeky new game… 1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and diagnoses in hospital 2 ) .
Estimated new hospital cases 3 ) .
Estimated new admissions to hospital from the community 4 ) .
Estimated new hospital admissions from the community with 3-7 day lagging 5 ) .
Total reported hospital admissions and diagnoses from a care home That ’ s right , three of the five tables are populated with estimates rather than what is actually happening on our wards .
These estimates are based on… reported new cases !
( Emphasis added ) Yes indeedy , they are converting those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hypothesised admission scenario .
I prefer to call it fudge .
I think we can guess what tables are going to be used for broadcast to the nation .
Can anyone spot the second game ?
Yep , NHS England , who used to distinguish between genuine admissions and inpatients testing positive up to 10th September , have now lumped them together in table 1 so the public are not going to know who is being admitted to hospital and was already in hospital suffering from some other condition .
( Emphasis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change in how COVID-19 admissions data are now coded and presented to the public .
In a nutshell an ‘ admission ’ is now both an admission proper and an inpatient who has been found positive during their stay .
The date of an inpatient test is now taken as the date of their COVID-19 ‘ admission ’ even though they ’ re already been admitted !
The astute among you will realise this improvement in data capture will lead to double-counting of bed occupancy .
( Emphasis added ) To illustrate the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ ve plotted out three pertinent time series for the period June – September .
The time series marked with a red line represents the new NHS England daily activity admissions indicator ( table 1 in the new file ) , for which admissions and inpatients are lumped together .
The time series marked with an orange line represents a variable I calculated from the old data file that I called ‘ COVID-19 bed load ’ , this being derived from admission and inpatient case counts .
As we may see there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agreement , which gives us faith in comparing old and new data files .
With this in mind let us now consider the time series for genuine admissions only , this being represented by the green line .
We now see that genuine admissions accounts for a fraction of the total COVID-19 NHS England bed load .
As I have stated before , COVID-19 , if anything , is primarily an institutional pandemic .
( Emphasis added ) With the admission and inpatient count now starting to rise in late September ( red @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know is whether this is the result of a rise in COVID-19 amongst admissions proper or a rise in COVID-19 amongst inpatients .
This distinction is critical in our understanding of whether we are at the beginning of genuine second wave or simply looking at an artefact of testing strategy .
For example , back in the week beginning 26th March pillar 1 testing averaged out at one test between two people in clinical care ( Pt=0.5 ) .
The test rate then proceeded to climb in a steady manner such that during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ observe just over 2.5 tests per patient in clinical care .
My trusty hand-held calculator reveals this represents a five-fold increase in the testing of those already known to be sick .
( Emphasis added ) This may well represent an improvement in care but it is going to skew results , and all this lather is without considering the wrinkle of the PCR test detecting the remains of an earlier infection !
If an earlier SARS-COV-2 infection left patients with various ailments e.g .
kidney damage then we are going to see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ renal conditions for people who are going to test positive but not be infectious .
( Emphasis added ) The critical issue here is that we ’ ve abandoned traditional methods of diagnosis by an admitting physician ( what we call differential diagnosis in the trade ) and replaced this by an automated numbers generator with the controversial RT-PCR test in the driving seat – and all because the WHO say so .
This is no longer clinical diagnosis as I used to know it .
( Emphasis added ) The bottom line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the real world the pandemic is declining , governments and the media tell us the exact opposite , and that more restrictions are needed to save us all from dying .
One of my social media friends wrote this recently , which sums up the situation pretty well : About the author : Andy Rowlands is a British Principia Scientific International researcher , writer and editor who co-edited the new climate science book , ‘ The Sky Dragon Slayers : Victory Lap ‘ PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Scoop: Govt Scientist Exposes COVID19 Hospital Beds Scam
Written by Andy Rowlands
The retired former government scientist I am acquainted with has been doing some crunching of numbers about how full our hospitals were and are during the Covid ‘pandemic’, and this is what he found.
Most of us hold an image of the pandemic in the UK as being thousands of stricken souls being ferried to overcrowded hospitals on a daily basis. We have the mainstream media to thank for this, along with the rawness of image pouring into our social media feeds from China and Italy. Some dared to question the narrative after discovering empty hospitals and plodding A&E departments, to be beaten down by a friend of a friend who had been working non-stop around the clock. Working non-stop around the clock, patients waiting several hours on trolleys and empty wards due to lack of nursing staff was pretty much normal in my old inner-city teaching hospital, so the curious among us never really got to understand what was actually going on above the level of the anecdote. Here I reveal what actually happened across all 315 service providers that make up the NHS England bed pool using official data; to say I am surprised by what I am finding is a serious understatement. I shall start with a slide of daily admissions of confirmed COVID-19 cases onto which I have also plotted daily diagnoses of COVID-19 arising from the testing of inpatients. Daily figures are defined as activity in the preceding 24 hours as at 8am each morning. Hopefully this slide speaks for itself but I realise a few words may be needed. When I first saw this chart, my response was that I had made a serious number crunching error, and had probably got the two series mixed up; either that or my spreadsheet had mangled the figures somehow. After triple-checking the data I can report this chart is accurate.
In a nutshell we may say that the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK has primarily been an in-hospital disease. At the peak of the outbreak between 1st April and 10th April just over five times as many existing inpatients were diagnosed with COVID-19 as were coming in through the front door with a diagnosis of COVID-19 (x5.35). This is not the image that had been painted by the mainstream media. We may now also see the reason for the confusion across social media. At a peak intake rate of 531 admitted cases across all 315 service providers on 9th April, NHS England’s emergency services never got truly stretched and many A&Es would indeed have idled as some have reported, though all depends on catchment area (my own A&E was always bursting to the seams even on a sunny day in May). In contrast, some poor souls had the task of managing beds of the 2,582 inpatients who were discovered to be lying there with COVID-19 on 3rd April. Hospitals were certainly busy but not with an influx of the public from the streets. A final but important point to make is that, by definition, inpatients were in hospital for reasons other than COVID-19 (otherwise they’d be classed as COVID-19 admissions). This tip of a co-morbidity iceberg that is seen in terms of bed occupancy also reveals itself in mortality where we find that, of a total of 29,531 COVID-19 deaths (as at 26th August), only 1,390 were for those presenting with no pre-existing medical condition. WHO directives to medical authorities state that death certification must show COVID-19 as cause regardless of co-morbidity, an extraordinary fact that prompted me to quip “you can no longer die of cancer”. (Emphasis added) Mechanical ventilation In terms of bed occupancy, the serious end of the pandemic concerns mechanical ventilation (MV) bed usage. I shall set aside arguments for and against ventilator use in the treatment of COVID-19 since this is a rather thorny and complicated issue. When it comes to the crunch intensivists working within the NHS would have had no option but to place patients on ventilation if ARDS set in and their condition was deteriorating. Mechanical ventilation will have killed some patients but then again they would have died without it, for at this stage no prophylactic such as HCQ or Ivermectin will have afforded a safe and sensible clinical strategy. In many cases death will have been inevitable and unavoidable. In the attached slide we get a feel for the size of the sharp end of the problem, with service providers within NHS England providing around 2,800 MV beds per day during the peak in early April. This equates to an average of roughly 9 beds per provider, though tertiary centres will have mostly taken the strain. Ventilation, like death, is a pretty robust indicator of what the disease has been doing and is now doing regardless of what the press and government may claim. Effectively we are looking at a disease that has come and gone. (Emphasis added)
The green curve for MV beds for other patients tells another side of the story. In early August we see this bobbing around 2,000 – 2,500 beds per day; we may assume this is business as usual for summer. If 2,000 – 2,500 MV beds is business as usual we may well ask what happened to the 1,500 patients per day that must have been denied a MV bed back in April in preparation for COVID-19. Did this bed shunting induce excess death or is a degree of MV bed occupancy unnecessary? This is one of those rather unpleasant questions we need to ask; I shall put it bluntly: did NHS MV bed management kill people? (Emphasis added) Another take home message from this slide is that ‘business as usual’ runs at 2,000 – 2,500 MV beds per day during the lean summer months whereas the peak pandemic only reached ~2,800 MV beds per day. This is a difference of just ~300 MV beds per day across 315 service providers. Can this really be called a pandemic? It will be interesting to see what happens when seasonal ‘flu hits this coming winter (assuming the PCR test fiasco permits seasonal ‘flu). Length of Stay Since we know the daily bed days occupied by COVID-19 cases together with the daily discharges what we can do is calculate accumulated bed days and divide this by accumulated discharges to arrive at an estimate of the average length of stay over time. If this is a bit of an early morning head-banger let us try a worked example… Up to 31st March of this year NHS England reported 65,972 bed days that had been allocated to COVID-19 patients. During this period some 3,414 COVID-19 cases had been discharged. Thus, on average, their length of stay equates to 65,972 / 3,414 = 19.32 days. Obviously, some will have recovered much quicker than this and some will have not but nevertheless we may say that, on average, the length of stay was 19.3 days. If we repeat this for 1st April we find 78,031 beds in use up to this point and 4,264 discharges giving an average length of stay of 18.3 days. Repeat this process and you end up with the attached chart.
Length of stay is a complex variable that acts as a proxy for both the condition of the patient and the effectiveness of treatment. During the last two weeks of March we observe elevated stays of around 20 days, and this will largely reflect the generally poor condition of the first COVID-19 patients. We noted above that the majority of cases during the early stages of the pandemic were inpatients rather than admissions. This chart also reflects the learning curve of medical teams, and in this regard, we see length of stay plunging to just 14 days within the space of a fortnight. By mid-April presenting condition and medical care had settled down into a routine which has slightly improved over time. The Hidden Cost In the wake of reports of deaths on waiting lists – something I warned about at the outset, what we are looking at in this slide is bed occupancy for all 315 service providers that go to make up the NHS England bed pool.
As we can see from occupancy levels for the relatively ‘normal’ week beginning 7th August our hospitals normally expect to provide around 100,000 beds on a daily basis. Back in April this was curtailed to 40,000 daily bed spaces per day – that’s a lot of missing beds and this would have translated into a great deal of pain and misery for the folk who would have used them. If we take 100,000 beds per day as the reference for healthy service levels, then deduct occupancy for both COVID-19 and other diseases, then we see that 1,666,772 bed-days were lost across the 315 service providers since 1st April because of Covid policies. I had noted elsewhere (in my previous article https://principia-scientific.com/uk-govt-play-fast-loose-on-covid-data-to-justify-more-restrictions/) that the dramatic rise in new cases – now being called a new wave – can be largely attributed to the dramatic rise in testing by calculating the Positive Swab Rate (PSR). When this is done, we find a very modest rise and a very definite spike that cannot be considered to be robust evidence of a ‘new wave’; spikes are not waves last time I looked. However, we also noted a rise in hospital admissions; though these are not admissions as such since the count includes inpatients who have been discovered to be positive during their stay. As already noted, a positive case does not necessarily mean an infectious case and an admission with COVID-19 doesn’t necessarily mean an admission because of COVID-19; there’s that old chestnut ‘of’ and ‘with’ again! At this point we may consider something may well be going on beneath the numbers despite all the additional testing and so I devised an indicator I am calling Bed Occupancy Rate (BOR). This is simply the accumulated number of daily bed days attributed to COVID-19 cases divided by the accumulated number of daily reported new cases. If reported new cases are translating into bed use then we should see this indicator rise over time or at least remain static. Except it doesn’t, it is decline. (Emphasis added) Attached is a plot of BOR for the period 1st June to 17th September. What we are looking at is a nose-dive that is indicative of a pandemic in decline. This is a splendidly graphic way of saying bed use is in decline whilst reported cases are rising; a bold and brazen clinical fact that is not commensurate with the government’s claims of a ‘new wave’. A new wave of just what, exactly? Irresponsible mass testing, perhaps? (Emphasis added)
If I were to put an alarmist spin on this, I’d claim that this is showing bed stays for COVID-19 cases are reducing because the stratum of the population the virus is now hitting is healthier, with all the vulnerable cases being hit back in April. There’s no evidence for this and similar claims that attempt to explain away lack of deaths, of course, but that doesn’t stop people waving their hands about and failing to provide evidence in support of their argument. The good news here is that I can analyse length of stay (LOS) to see if this is diminishing, thus bolstering the case for alarmists. I calculated this at a steady decline in average stay from 14.01 days at 1st June to 13.16 days on 2nd September for service providers making up NHS England, this representing a 6.1% drop in LOS. During this exact same period BOR dropped from 3.40 beds per case on 1st June to 3.07 beds per case on 2nd September, this representing a 9.7% drop in BOR. We now see that shorter length of stay is indeed contributing to the situation but the net result is that BOR is still diminishing, which is indicative of a pandemic in general decline. (Emphasis added) The data I’m obtaining for my bed occupancy project (BOP) from NHS England is valuable in that it reveals just who was admitted to hospital as a positive case and who was an inpatient who tested positive. As we have recently discovered the gov.uk coronavirus dashboard calls them both ‘admissions’. The NHS England daily hospital activity file also usefully reveals bed use for COVID-19 and other patients as well as discharge counts for COVID-19 by age band but this file is only updated monthly with the last release dated 10th September. This means I am unable to verify or refute headlines as they happen, which is rather frustrating since the data are already sitting there on NHS England’s servers. This morning I have noted that NHS England are now producing another activity file – the COVID-19 daily situation report. This sounds like it is going to be useful but it only provides data on admissions; and there’s a rather cheeky twist. Five tables are provided and I am going to list their headings to see if you can spot the cheeky new game… 1). Total reported admissions to hospital and diagnoses in hospital
2). Estimated new hospital cases
3). Estimated new admissions to hospital from the community
4). Estimated new hospital admissions from the community with 3-7 day lagging
5). Total reported hospital admissions and diagnoses from a care home That’s right, three of the five tables are populated with estimates rather than what is actually happening on our wards. These estimates are based on… reported new cases! (Emphasis added) Yes indeedy, they are converting those rather suspicious new case counts and generating a hypothesised admission scenario. I prefer to call it fudge. I think we can guess what tables are going to be used for broadcast to the nation. Can anyone spot the second game? Yep, NHS England, who used to distinguish between genuine admissions and inpatients testing positive up to 10th September, have now lumped them together in table 1 so the public are not going to know who is being admitted to hospital and was already in hospital suffering from some other condition. (Emphasis added) I alerted folk to a change in how COVID-19 admissions data are now coded and presented to the public. In a nutshell an ‘admission’ is now both an admission proper and an inpatient who has been found positive during their stay. The date of an inpatient test is now taken as the date of their COVID-19 ‘admission’ even though they’re already been admitted! The astute among you will realise this improvement in data capture will lead to double-counting of bed occupancy. (Emphasis added) To illustrate the situation as colourfully and clearly as possible I’ve plotted out three pertinent time series for the period June – September. The time series marked with a red line represents the new NHS England daily activity admissions indicator (table 1 in the new file), for which admissions and inpatients are lumped together.
The time series marked with an orange line represents a variable I calculated from the old data file that I called ‘COVID-19 bed load’, this being derived from admission and inpatient case counts. As we may see there is a period of overlap with excellent agreement, which gives us faith in comparing old and new data files. With this in mind let us now consider the time series for genuine admissions only, this being represented by the green line. We now see that genuine admissions accounts for a fraction of the total COVID-19 NHS England bed load. As I have stated before, COVID-19, if anything, is primarily an institutional pandemic. (Emphasis added) With the admission and inpatient count now starting to rise in late September (red line) what we still do not know is whether this is the result of a rise in COVID-19 amongst admissions proper or a rise in COVID-19 amongst inpatients. This distinction is critical in our understanding of whether we are at the beginning of genuine second wave or simply looking at an artefact of testing strategy. For example, back in the week beginning 26th March pillar 1 testing averaged out at one test between two people in clinical care (Pt=0.5). The test rate then proceeded to climb in a steady manner such that during the week beginning 27th August we may observe just over 2.5 tests per patient in clinical care. My trusty hand-held calculator reveals this represents a five-fold increase in the testing of those already known to be sick. (Emphasis added) This may well represent an improvement in care but it is going to skew results, and all this lather is without considering the wrinkle of the PCR test detecting the remains of an earlier infection! If an earlier SARS-COV-2 infection left patients with various ailments e.g. kidney damage then we are going to see a rise in hospital admissions for deteriorating renal conditions for people who are going to test positive but not be infectious. (Emphasis added) The critical issue here is that we’ve abandoned traditional methods of diagnosis by an admitting physician (what we call differential diagnosis in the trade) and replaced this by an automated numbers generator with the controversial RT-PCR test in the driving seat – and all because the WHO say so. This is no longer clinical diagnosis as I used to know it. (Emphasis added)
The bottom line of this work shows that while in the real world the pandemic is declining, governments and the media tell us the exact opposite, and that more restrictions are needed to save us all from dying.
One of my social media friends wrote this recently, which sums up the situation pretty well:
Lots of kids in a class room – fine.
Working with a full workplace – fine.
Trains and buses full of people – fine.
Being in a pub with drunk people – fine.
Packed supermarket – fine.
On an airplane with hundreds breathing the same recycled air – fine.
Eating out at any restaurant – fine. Having more than 6 family members or friends in the same house – too dangerous. And they wonder why people don’t follow the guidelines…..
I rest my case M’Lud.
About the author: Andy Rowlands is a British Principia Scientific International researcher, writer and editor who co-edited the new climate science book, ‘The Sky Dragon Slayers: Victory Lap‘
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-10-03--Medical Journal Wants ‘Penalties’ for Anyone Refusing COVID19 Vaccine

Medical Journal Wants ‘ Penalties ’ for Anyone Refusing COVID19 Vaccine A paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine has called for mandating a coronavirus vaccine , and outlined strategies for how Americans could be FORCED to take it .
The paper warns that an immediate mandate for the vaccine would spark too much resistance and backlash , so the writers suggest that at first it should be voluntary .
However , it suggests that if not enough people are willing to get the vaccine within the first few weeks of it ’ s availability , it should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ penalties put into place for refusal .
The paper outlines “ six trigger criteria ” that need to be met before the vaccine is made mandatory , and that it should be rolled out to specific demographics of the population first .
“ Only recommended groups should be considered for a vaccination mandate , ” initially , according to the paper , which cites “ high risk groups ” as the first set of people .
It also suggests that active-duty military service members should be among the first that are forced into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ noncompliance should incur a penalty ” and notes that it should be a “ relatively substantial ” one .
It suggests that “ employment suspension or stay-at-home orders , ” should be issued , but that fines should be discouraged because they can be legally challenged , and “ may stoke distrust without improving uptake.
” The paper also suggests that government health authorities should avoid making public their close relationship with vaccine manufacturers , to quell public mistrust .
Just coincidentally , the authors of the paper reside at Yale and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for vaccine development .
The prospect of denying freedom of movement to those who refuse to vaccinate has been floated recently in the UK , where government health officials have also suggested that the jab should be made mandatory .
In the US , calls have been made to make any vaccination mandatory with the likes of the New York Times expressing concern that half of Americans would refuse to take it .
In Canada , a poll recently revealed that 60 per cent think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ available it should be made mandatory .
In addition , Canada ’ s current Chief Public Health Officer appeared in a recently resurfaced 2010 documentary in which she advocated using mandatory “ tracking bracelets ” for people who refuse to take a vaccine after a virus outbreak .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Medical Journal Wants ‘Penalties’ for Anyone Refusing COVID19 Vaccine
Written by Steve Watson
A paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine has called for mandating a coronavirus vaccine, and outlined strategies for how Americans could be FORCED to take it.
The paper warns that an immediate mandate for the vaccine would spark too much resistance and backlash, so the writers suggest that at first it should be voluntary.
However, it suggests that if not enough people are willing to get the vaccine within the first few weeks of it’s availability, it should be transformed into an obligation, with penalties put into place for refusal.
The paper outlines “six trigger criteria” that need to be met before the vaccine is made mandatory, and that it should be rolled out to specific demographics of the population first.
“Only recommended groups should be considered for a vaccination mandate,” initially, according to the paper, which cites “high risk groups” as the first set of people.
“[T]he elderly, health professionals working in high-risk situations or working with high-risk patients…persons with certain underlying medical conditions,” as well as those in “high-density settings such as prisons and dormitories” should be mandated to get the jab, the paper says.
It also suggests that active-duty military service members should be among the first that are forced into the vaccination.
The paper proclaims that “noncompliance should incur a penalty” and notes that it should be a “relatively substantial” one.
It suggests that “employment suspension or stay-at-home orders,” should be issued, but that fines should be discouraged because they can be legally challenged, and “may stoke distrust without improving uptake.”
The paper also suggests that government health authorities should avoid making public their close relationship with vaccine manufacturers, to quell public mistrust.
Just coincidentally, the authors of the paper reside at Yale and Stanford, institutions that have received substantial funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for vaccine development.
The prospect of denying freedom of movement to those who refuse to vaccinate has been floated recently in the UK, where government health officials have also suggested that the jab should be made mandatory.
In the US, calls have been made to make any vaccination mandatory with the likes of the New York Times expressing concern that half of Americans would refuse to take it.
In Canada, a poll recently revealed that 60 per cent think that when a vaccine for coronavirus becomes available it should be made mandatory.
In addition, Canada’s current Chief Public Health Officer appeared in a recently resurfaced 2010 documentary in which she advocated using mandatory “tracking bracelets” for people who refuse to take a vaccine after a virus outbreak.
Read more at Summit News
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-10-05--UK’s Mass COVID Vaccine Program Politically Targeted: ‘Wealthy’ Exempt

The UK government is pressing ahead in earnest hiring hundreds of new NHS managers to oversee the mandatory COVID vaccine rollout .
Dissenting voices in the scientific and medical professions are fighting back .
Below are select new disturbing developments in the war on our freedom .
The latest reports are showing clearly that the mass vaccination program is politically targeted against the poor and favors the richest in society who are to be made exempt .
Confirming this is evidence received by Principia Scientific International of a slew of new vacancies for NHS managers willing to enact the mass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) What is clear , from the locations of these new NHS vacancies , is that the government is first targeting the poorer communities and all those over 50 years of age who are not wealthy .
Picking up on this injustice is the latest edition of the Sunday Times , ’ No coronavirus lockdown for top Tory constituencies ’ ( October 04 , 2020 ) .
Speaking to the UK Times Professor Dominic Harrison , the director of public health for Blackburn with Darwen , explained he had complained to the DHSC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact the poorest and least able to defend themselves against government overreach .
As readers who have followed our coverage of the man-made global warming fiasco , the root of the problem is that governments are now actively carrying out the stated policy enshrined within the UN ’ s Agenda 21 .
According to the United Nations website , Agenda 21 is a The details are set out in the UN Johannesburg Earth Summit 2002 .
PDF here .
We must all understand that every major international institution has been corrupted in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the planet .
Plain reading of the UN ’ s plans with Agenda 21 is a good place to start .
Not anywhere in that document do we see the words ‘ democracy ’ , ‘ free elections ’ , ‘ public accountability.
’ Absent such terms we can deduce that they are not only irrelevant to the proposed ‘ Great Reset ’ coming our way , but more likely than not , these key aspects of civil liberties are anathema to The Plan .
Wikipedia defines the UN ’ s Agenda 21 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ An action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development ” .
“ Sustainable development ” is the catchphrase they repeat and it is a green mantra we should beware because it is also the justification for scaling back the global population on Malthusian principles that claims there are too many humans on this planet .
We know The Plan is mass vaccination and is linked to de-population from the very words of COVID19 vaccine pioneer billionaire , ( non ) Dr Bill Gates , who admitted : It ties in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ digital ID project ID2020 Alliance .
Thrown into the mix is that Bill Gates has recently acquired a satanic-looking patent with the number : WO/2020/060606 No wonder then that the QAnon movement is getting serious traction by claiming the global elite are psychopathic Satanist when Uncle Bill has the mark of the beast ( 666 ) proudly on his new venture .
Patent WO/2020/060606 was registered on March 26 , 2020 and filed by the company that made Bill a billionaire , Microsoft Technology Licensing , LLC , back on June 20 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 2020 , the patent was granted international status .
The title of the patent is “ Cryptocurrency system using body activity data ” .
I do have a feeling that come 2021 we might see Bill ’ s patent combined with the COVID vaccine to ‘ kill two birds with one stone ’ and trigger the abolition of all currencies in favor of this implant ( because of hyperinflation , you know ! )
.
The slick business plan is to put the new currency implant together with the miraculous COVID vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ annually .
But the sheeple will think it cool because it comes with a neat quantum dot tattoo which lights up when exposed to a blue light !
All to help show your vaccination history .
The substance that lights up is derived from fireflies and is called LUCIFERASE Image above ) and the company producing the RFID chip is LUCENT Technologies ( image below ) and was housed in 666 Fifth Avenue , which I ’ m told Jared Kushner once owned .
Once it is understood that when the global elite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control ’ into the same sentence you soon realize that the pandemic ( or plandemic ) serves them well in realizing their goals .
Those regular readers who have followed our articles on the man-made global warming fraud will be familiar with UN Agenda 21 , a plan that dictates where one can live and what land should be designated for human use all to ‘ save the planet.
’ But where global warming fear porn failed , stoking virus panic fared better .
The global elite are moving forward with Agenda 21 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ covid ‘ lockdown.
’ Either way , the desired outcome is achieved : a crashed economy .
But , as we have shown in numerous articles from highly credentialed scientists and medical experts , global warming fears were based on the thinnest science .
The same goes with COVID19 .
There exists no robust scientific proof for the existence of any such deadly virus because no laboratory has yet isolated it and achieved any replication which comports with Koch ’ s Postulates .
Last week came another new glitch when the UN ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on their own dodgy numbers , the current pandemic is less deadly than any of the last three pandemics .
WHO concedes that it can not claim any more than one tenth of the deaths predicted last February on government computer models .
We now enter a period of mass awakening as the official mortality rate is only 0.2 percent , or thereabouts .
That figure puts the ‘ deadly ’ coronavirus in the same ballpark as a normal influenza season .
Anyone halfway numerate can see the utter over-reaction of politicians , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media and other self-serving groups who pumped up the fear porn to maximum volume .
But not a minute of broadcast time is spent in discussion or debate over a cost/benefit analysis for the pros and cons of the lockdowns .
Likewise , there have been no open scientific media discussion on the pros and cons of mass vaccination with a ‘ rushed out ’ vaccine .
I hear Bill Gates admits around 700,000 may die from the vaccine .
But even discounting all those avoidable deaths how effective would the vaccine be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that pharmaceutical corporations have tried for over 30 years to develop a vaccine against the common corona viruses and failed .
Yet Big Pharma are boasting that within a matter of weeks they can successfully develop a safe and effective vaccine against a “ new ” virus , employing a new technology – not by using the old-fashioned weakened virus particles , but by altering your body ’ s DNA .
It is now a reasonable assertion to state this whole thing is being exposed as an orchestrated pony show .
Humanity is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ false alarm .
If the latest comments section in the UK ’ s Daily Mail is anything to go by then 90 percent of Brits do not appear to want Bill ’ s vaccine .
Winston Churchill was right when he said the wars of the future will be fought in the mind .
The lockdowners are waging war on We The People with a divide and conquer strategy which first targets the poorest as guinea pigs in their mandatory experimental toxic vaccine escapade .
The elderly and infirm in care homes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ escape or hire expensive lawyers will go first .
The rest of us are on the conveyor belt and will meet a similar fate until Agenda 21 is fulfilled and the global population reduced to 500 million ( the stated goal for ‘ sustainable ’ living ) .
We are in a war for our human rights and our very lives .
Absent independent , unbiased and open scientific debate on the merits and demerits sane , intelligent beings are insisting on our right to say ‘ no ’ and our message to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go hang !
’ About the author : John O ’ Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder ( with Dr Tim Ball ) of Principia Scientific International ( PSI ) .
John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert , Michael ‘ hockey stick ’ Mann in the ‘ science trial of the century ‘ .
O ’ Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘ Slayers ’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

UK’s Mass COVID Vaccine Program Politically Targeted: ‘Wealthy’ Exempt
Written by John O'Sullivan
The UK government is pressing ahead in earnest hiring hundreds of new NHS managers to oversee the mandatory COVID vaccine rollout. Dissenting voices in the scientific and medical professions are fighting back. Below are select new disturbing developments in the war on our freedom.
The latest reports are showing clearly that the mass vaccination program is politically targeted against the poor and favors the richest in society who are to be made exempt.
Confirming this is evidence received by Principia Scientific International of a slew of new vacancies for NHS managers willing to enact the mass mandatory vaccine rollout (see image below)
What is clear, from the locations of these new NHS vacancies, is that the government is first targeting the poorer communities and all those over 50 years of age who are not wealthy. Picking up on this injustice is the latest edition of the Sunday Times, ’No coronavirus lockdown for top Tory constituencies’ (October 04, 2020).
Speaking to the UK Times Professor Dominic Harrison, the director of public health for Blackburn with Darwen, explained he had complained to the DHSC that the measures are inequitable and unjustly impact the poorest and least able to defend themselves against government overreach.
As readers who have followed our coverage of the man-made global warming fiasco, the root of the problem is that governments are now actively carrying out the stated policy enshrined within the UN’s Agenda 21.
According to the United Nations website, Agenda 21 is a
“comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the United Nations system, government, and major groups, in every area in which humans have impact on the environment”.
The details are set out in the UN Johannesburg Earth Summit 2002. PDF here.
We must all understand that every major international institution has been corrupted in the cause of a globalist agenda to depopulate the planet. Plain reading of the UN’s plans with Agenda 21 is a good place to start.
Not anywhere in that document do we see the words ‘democracy’, ‘free elections’, ‘public accountability.’ Absent such terms we can deduce that they are not only irrelevant to the proposed ‘Great Reset’ coming our way, but more likely than not, these key aspects of civil liberties are anathema to The Plan.
Wikipedia defines the UN’s Agenda 21 (aka Agenda 2030) as “An action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development”. “Sustainable development” is the catchphrase they repeat and it is a green mantra we should beware because it is also the justification for scaling back the global population on Malthusian principles that claim too many humans are on this planet.
We know The Plan is mass vaccination and is linked to de-population from the very words of COVID19 vaccine pioneer billionaire, (non) Dr Bill Gates, who admitted:
“The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care & reproductive health services, we could LOWER that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.” – Bill Gates. Ted talk 2010 (video excerpt below)
It ties in with another Bill Gates scheme – the digital ID project ID2020 Alliance. Thrown into the mix is that Bill Gates has recently acquired a satanic-looking patent with the number: WO/2020/060606
No wonder then that the QAnon movement is getting serious traction by claiming the global elite are psychopathic Satanist when Uncle Bill has the mark of the beast (666) proudly on his new venture.
Patent WO/2020/060606 was registered on March 26, 2020 and filed by the company that made Bill a billionaire, Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC, back on June 20, 2019, and, on April 22, 2020, the patent was granted international status. The title of the patent is “Cryptocurrency system using body activity data”.
As Leonid Savin reported for orientalreview.org:
“[T]here are strong links between organisations and companies like the Rockefeller Foundation, Microsoft, the pharmaceutical lobby and the World Bank Group, not to mention secondary service providers. They are trying to play the role of a supranational government by constantly focusing on the fact that, these days, national governments cannot cope with epidemics, illnesses, famines, etc. single-handed.”
I do have a feeling that come 2021 we might see Bill’s patent combined with the COVID vaccine to ‘kill two birds with one stone’ and trigger the abolition of all currencies in favor of this implant (because of hyperinflation, you know!).
The slick business plan is to put the new currency implant together with the miraculous COVID vaccine and require that it need be refreshed annually. But the sheeple will think it cool because it comes with a neat quantum dot tattoo which lights up when exposed to a blue light! All to help show your vaccination history.
The substance that lights up is derived from fireflies and is called LUCIFERASE Image above) and the company producing the RFID chip is LUCENT Technologies (image below) and was housed in 666 Fifth Avenue, which I’m told Jared Kushner once owned.
Once it is understood that when the global elite put ‘sustainable’ and ‘population control’ into the same sentence you soon realize that the pandemic (or plandemic) serves them well in realizing their goals.
Those regular readers who have followed our articles on the man-made global warming fraud will be familiar with UN Agenda 21, a plan that dictates where one can live and what land should be designated for human use all to ‘save the planet.’
But where global warming fear porn failed, stoking virus panic fared better. The global elite are moving forward with Agenda 21 by switching all efforts to the global covid ‘lockdown.’ Either way, the desired outcome is achieved: a crashed economy.
But, as we have shown in numerous articles from highly credentialed scientists and medical experts, global warming fears were based on the thinnest science. The same goes with COVID19. There exists no robust scientific proof for the existence of any such deadly virus because no laboratory has yet isolated it and achieved any replication which comports with Koch’s Postulates.
Last week came another new glitch when the UN’s WHO admitted, that even based on their own dodgy numbers, the current pandemic is less deadly than any of the last three pandemics. WHO concedes that it cannot claim any more than one tenth of the deaths predicted last February on government computer models.
We now enter a period of mass awakening as the official mortality rate is only 0.2 percent, or thereabouts. That figure puts the ‘deadly’ coronavirus in the same ballpark as a normal influenza season.
Anyone halfway numerate can see the utter over-reaction of politicians, the UN’s WHO, the media and other self-serving groups who pumped up the fear porn to maximum volume.
But not a minute of broadcast time is spent in discussion or debate over a cost/benefit analysis for the pros and cons of the lockdowns. Likewise, there have been no open scientific media discussion on the pros and cons of mass vaccination with a ‘rushed out’ vaccine.
I hear Bill Gates admits around 700,000 may die from the vaccine. But even discounting all those avoidable deaths how effective would the vaccine be anyway?
We know all too well that pharmaceutical corporations have tried for over 30 years to develop a vaccine against the common corona viruses and failed.
Yet Big Pharma are boasting that within a matter of weeks they can successfully develop a safe and effective vaccine against a “new” virus, employing a new technology – not by using the old-fashioned weakened virus particles, but by altering your body’s DNA.
It is now a reasonable assertion to state this whole thing is being exposed as an orchestrated pony show. Humanity is under attack on the basis of a false alarm. If the latest comments section in the UK’s Daily Mail is anything to go by then 90 percent of Brits do not appear to want Bill’s vaccine.
Winston Churchill was right when he said the wars of the future will be fought in the mind. The lockdowners are waging war on We The People with a divide and conquer strategy which first targets the poorest as guinea pigs in their mandatory experimental toxic vaccine escapade. The elderly and infirm in care homes, the unemployed, those not able to escape or hire expensive lawyers will go first. The rest of us are on the conveyor belt and will meet a similar fate until Agenda 21 is fulfilled and the global population reduced to 500 million (the stated goal for ‘sustainable’ living).
We are in a war for our human rights and our very lives. Absent independent, unbiased and open scientific debate on the merits and demerits sane, intelligent beings are insisting on our right to say ‘no’ and our message to the lockdowners and vaccine pushers is ‘go hang!’
About the author: John O’Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder (with Dr Tim Ball) of Principia Scientific International (PSI). John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann in the ‘science trial of the century‘. O’Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘Slayers’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world’s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-10-05--UK Petition to Government Against Use of False Covid-19 Test Data

UK Petition to Government Against Use of False Covid-19 Test Data For those readers who live in the UK and share our concerns over the diabolical misuse of the PCR COVID19 test please consider adding your name to this important new petition to Parliament .
PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION HERE : petition.parliament.uk Why we argue the polymerase chain reaction ( PCR ) test – used by governments as the bellwether for coronavirus – is not fit for purpose : Health experts now say that PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 , the virus associated with the illness COVID-19 , is too sensitive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out people who have insignificant amounts of the virus in their system .
As we reported last month : “ The PCR test is so well known for giving inaccurate results that the CDC warns not to give the test to asymptomatic persons “ because of the increased likelihood of false-positive results.
” In fact , there is a famous Chinese paper that stated if you ’ re testing asymptomatic people with PCR , up to 80 % of positives could be false positives .
But the numbers aren ’ t just skewed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skewed by how many people are offered the test and what condition they are in .
For example , during the first few weeks of the ‘ pandemic ’ tests were scarce .
As they became more widely available of course the number of infections accounted for increased as well , and false-positive results further increased those numbers.
” Widespread reliance on the PCR for COVID19 testing is beyond stupid .
It is criminal because it is pushed as justification for maintaining ‘ lockdown ’ measures and compounding the fear and misery ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is still suffering as a consequence of this gigantic science fraud .
Please donate below to support our ongoing work to expose the lies about COVID19 At Principia Scientific International we are working hard to lobby elected government officials , fellow scientists and medical practitioners and relevant public health bodies to end the insane lockdown measures and assist us in exposing the pandemic fraud .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

UK Petition to Government Against Use of False Covid-19 Test Data
Written by John O'Sullivan
For those readers who live in the UK and share our concerns over the diabolical misuse of the PCR COVID19 test please consider adding your name to this important new petition to Parliament.
PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION HERE: petition.parliament.uk
Why we argue the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test – used by governments as the bellwether for coronavirus – is not fit for purpose:
Health experts now say that PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2, the virus associated with the illness COVID-19, is too sensitive and needs to be adjusted to rule out people who have insignificant amounts of the virus in their system.
“I’m skeptical that a PCR test is ever true. It’s a great scientific research tool. It’s a horrible tool for clinical medicine,” warns Dr. David Rasnick, biochemist and protease developer.
As we reported last month:
“The PCR test is so well known for giving inaccurate results that the CDC warns not to give the test to asymptomatic persons “because of the increased likelihood of false-positive results.” In fact, there is a famous Chinese paper that stated if you’re testing asymptomatic people with PCR, up to 80% of positives could be false positives. But the numbers aren’t just skewed by false positives, they are also skewed by how many people are offered the test and what condition they are in. For example, during the first few weeks of the ‘pandemic’ tests were scarce. As they became more widely available of course the number of infections accounted for increased as well, and false-positive results further increased those numbers.”
Widespread reliance on the PCR for COVID19 testing is beyond stupid. It is criminal because it is pushed as justification for maintaining ‘lockdown’ measures and compounding the fear and misery (including economic) much of the world is still suffering as a consequence of this gigantic science fraud.
Please donate below to support our ongoing work to expose the lies about COVID19
At Principia Scientific International we are working hard to lobby elected government officials, fellow scientists and medical practitioners and relevant public health bodies to end the insane lockdown measures and assist us in exposing the pandemic fraud.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-10-05--International Lawsuits: ‘Crimes against Humanity’ for COVID19 Scam

Lawsuits in the United States and in Europe are being filed against the large corporate perpetrators of the coronavirus fake pandemic .
International lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich , with a successful track record against the likes of Deutsche Bank and VW Audi , has posted a new Youtube video announcing the new legal actions .
“ I have been practicing law against fraudulent corporations for over 26 years .
We must ensure that , on a political level , never again should anyone be allowed to be in a position to defraud humanity and attempt to manipulate us with their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Dr Fuellmich is one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee .
Since July the committee has been receiving testimony and evidence from some of the world ’ s eminent scientists and medical professionals as part of building a mountain of evidence to help put behind bars all those psychopaths who have “ committed crimes against humanity ” in their COVID19 scam .
The video details how the process of prosecuting these legal claims will proceed .
Crimes against humanity were first defined by the Nuremburg Trials after the Second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tried , sentenced and put to death for the mass extermination of political prisoners , ‘ social undesirables ’ and those who were Jewish .
Legal analysts see direct parallels with those war crimes and the agenda , events and outcomes of today whereby many tens of thousands of innocent people have either lost their lives and many hundreds of millions have suffered devastating emotional , physical and financial injury in the “ cause ” of population control .
In the United States , United Kingdom and Australia Principia Scientific International is similarly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parties – including many elected national representatives – to further the process of bringing the guilty to justice .
Many of our readers will recall our famous legal victory against ‘ world leading climate scientist ’ Dr Michael ‘ Fraudster ’ Mann .
Please consider making a donation to PSI today ( see below ) to help support our unpaid mission to defend humanity against this evil .
About the author : John O ’ Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder ( with Dr Tim Ball ) of Principia Scientific International ( PSI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert , Michael ‘ hockey stick ’ Mann in the ‘ science trial of the century ‘ .
O ’ Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘ Slayers ’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world ’ s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

International Lawsuits: ‘Crimes against Humanity’ for COVID19 Scam
Written by John O'Sullivan
Lawsuits in the United States and in Europe are being filed against the large corporate perpetrators of the coronavirus fake pandemic. International lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, with a successful track record against the likes of Deutsche Bank and VW Audi, has posted a new Youtube video announcing the new legal actions.
“I have been practicing law against fraudulent corporations for over 26 years. We must ensure that, on a political level, never again should anyone be allowed to be in a position to defraud humanity and attempt to manipulate us with their corrupt agendas,” said Dr Fuellmich.
Dr Fuellmich is one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee. Since July the committee has been receiving testimony and evidence from some of the world’s eminent scientists and medical professionals as part of building a mountain of evidence to help put behind bars all those psychopaths who have “committed crimes against humanity” in their COVID19 scam.
“The Corona Crisis will have to be renamed as the Corona Scandal and everyone involved must be criminally prosecuted and sued for damages”, said the international litigator.
The video details how the process of prosecuting these legal claims will proceed. Crimes against humanity were first defined by the Nuremburg Trials after the Second World War when leading Nazi figures were tried, sentenced and put to death for the mass extermination of political prisoners, ‘social undesirables’ and those who were Jewish.
Legal analysts see direct parallels with those war crimes and the agenda, events and outcomes of today whereby many tens of thousands of innocent people have either lost their lives and many hundreds of millions have suffered devastating emotional, physical and financial injury in the “cause” of population control.
Watch the video at www.youtube.com
In the United States, United Kingdom and Australia Principia Scientific International is similarly providing scientific evidence and corresponding with interested parties – including many elected national representatives – to further the process of bringing the guilty to justice. Many of our readers will recall our famous legal victory against ‘world leading climate scientist’ Dr Michael ‘Fraudster’ Mann.
Please consider making a donation to PSI today (see below) to help support our unpaid mission to defend humanity against this evil.
About the author: John O’Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder (with Dr Tim Ball) of Principia Scientific International (PSI). John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann in the ‘science trial of the century‘. O’Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘Slayers’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world’s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related