Lockdown effects now killing/harming more people than Covid

[Razorblades]

I think there's quite a few that are still like that, though I haven't been into my GPs surgery so have no idea if they are as well

Happily, whilst there's a sign on the outer door telling those who pass to mask-up, there's no-one taking any notice at my local health centre, and the bare-faced reception staff obviously don't say anything.

 

[duncanp]

More evidence of the effects of all the COVID restrictions

Well, today, it’s the lockdown enthusiasts who stand accused of abetting a massacre. Remember when, every night, the news used to update the total of Covid deaths? I’d like to see the BBC and ITV start reporting the daily toll of lives lost because cancers (and heart disease) were found too late

I would like to know what all the locktivists have to say in response.

What is the NHS doing with our £136bn?

The cancer catastrophe is fast becoming one of the biggest avoidable tragedies of modern times and urgent action must be taken

www.telegraph.co.uk

Lockdown hysteria led to an NHS cancer catastrophe – and the Government is in denial​

This is fast becoming one of the biggest avoidable tragedies of modern times and urgent action must be taken before more lives are lost

ugust seems a tad early for the NHS winter crisis but, apparently, it’s never too soon to start warning people not to use their health service. To be fair, we only spend £136 billion a year on it and they have got one of the world’s biggest bureaucracies to look after, fleets of luxury cars to subsidise for staff etc, so it would be entirely unreasonable to expect any treatment. You do have to marvel, though, at the brass neck of those who are planning a campaign which will urge the public to avoid A&E.
“Tell you what, Barry, let’s not have an accident today.”
“Don’t be daft, Val, love, you can’t plan on not having an accident. That’s why it’s called an accident.”
“But the NHS says it’s under strain and they don’t want us going to A&E for an accident unless it’s an emergency.”
“How do we know if it’s an emergency?”


“You call 111 and ask, Barry.”
“We’re going to hang on the phone for half an hour to ask some medically-unqualified, call-centre divot if we’ve got an emergency? Whatever next – Do-It-Yourself defibrillators in the home?”
“Not with your angina, Barry, love.”
“Are we still allowed to call an ambulance, Val?”
“Yes, but it won’t come.”
“Why not?”
“Because A&E is full of all the people who can’t see their GP. So the ambulances can’t unload patients. Sadie says there’s this amazing country where you can directly call your GP in the evenings and at weekends and they refer you to a specialist instantly by text and you can choose a date and time of your appointment from this list of options.”
“Where’s that then, Val?”
“Ukraine.”
We’ve had enough, haven’t we? God knows, we are a tolerant people, but we’ve had enough. Because we did as we were told last time and stayed at home to support the NHS, the Office for National Statistics says there are now at least 1,000 more deaths than usual every week. In the spring of 2020, I predicted that lockdown would end up killing more people than Covid – one of only a handful of journalists prepared to ask what was going to happen to all the other ill people if the NHS shut them out. “Pearson wants people to die,” was the standard retort.
Well, today, it’s the lockdown enthusiasts who stand accused of abetting a massacre. Remember when, every night, the news used to update the total of Covid deaths? I’d like to see the BBC and ITV start reporting the daily toll of lives lost because cancers (and heart disease) were found too late. A terrifyingly large and growing number in the corner of the screen might just wake the public up to what I believe is fast becoming one of the biggest avoidable tragedies of modern times.

Imagine a train full of commuters hurtling towards a truck which has broken down on the line ahead. Passengers are screaming at the driver to take action and avert disaster. He acts as if he can’t hear them. That, ladies and gentlemen, is what is happening every single day to cancer patients in the UK.
Some of our most eminent oncologists are shouting at the Department of Health and the NHS, pleading with them to please, please, take the urgent action that will save the lives of countless men, women and children. Nothing happens.
This week, I spoke to clinical oncologist Prof Pat Price for the Planet Normal podcast. She told me that, even before the pandemic, the UK had among the lowest cancer survival rates of Western countries, but that dire situation is now a full-blown catastrophe which is not being seen elsewhere.
“There will be tens of thousands of cancer patients who will lose their lives prematurely because of this,” says Price. “For every four weeks’ delay in treatment, there’s on average a 10 per cent reduction in survival. Once you get past a tipping point with the spread, it can’t be cured. That also means we often have to do more for those desperately ill patients and, again, we’re running out of treatment capacity. It’s a vicious circle.”
Price points to systemic failure. “It’s patients feeling they can’t bother the NHS yet or not being able to get GP appointments. Then, referrals are taking too long and when patients do get into hospitals there are backlogs for biopsies and scans and then more delays to see radiotherapy and surgeons. It’s delays throughout the whole process and it’s getting worse and worse every day.”

The Government and NHS management are in complete denial. “For the first nine months, we had NHS senior management saying they didn’t know if there was a cancer backlog. After nine months, we had this so-called Recovery Group and cancer care was going to get better by March 2021. No action points in it, just hope,” recalls a despairing Price, “And then that failed. The next year, we were going to do better and again nothing happened. It was only when Sajid Javid became health secretary, nearly two years in, that they said, ‘Oh, there is a problem. Let’s have a war on cancer!’ Too late.”

An exasperated Price notes that, in this year’s Queen’s Speech, the Government said they’d fix the cancer backlog by March 2023. “How? How are you going to do that if you don’t do anything. And you know, Allison, I think now it’s just got too difficult for them to deal with.”

The scandal may be even more toxic than we know. In order to cope with the lack of capacity, the NHS introduced what it called “stratified treatment”. That’s rationing to you and me. I didn’t know that the NICE guidelines, during the Covid pandemic, included prioritisation of cancer patients according to “curability”, and those were only withdrawn as late as May this year. Got a brain tumour? Bad luck, go to the back of the radiotherapy queue!

“Some might describe this as a form of ‘stratification’,” says Price, “But whatever euphemisms are used, this lack of capacity chasm risks us facing a form of ‘back door’ rationing, an outcome that would be unthinkable to the profession and a possibility that ought to spur our political leaders to action as never before.”

With 35 other top British oncologists, Price is calling for a major national effort on a par with the world-beating vaccine rollout. “You make sure we’ve got the PM’s approval to go away and do whatever is necessary. You cast away your bureaucracy. You use the data, you get every single best brain on it. You get radiotherapy centres equipped properly, put the machines in the diagnostic hubs, get staff in, empower the frontline, get surgery into the cancer hubs. You make sure that the 62-day target (until starting cancer treatment) is the extreme not the norm. It can be done, it really can.”

All we have seen so far is health ministers and cancer directors employed by NHS England spouting PR puffery about the extra billions that have been poured in, which now seem to have been absorbed by – surprise! – staff pay increases.

No wonder Price is at her wits’ end. Before the pandemic, around 460 people would die every day of cancer. Without immediate intervention – what Pat calls “a handbrake-turn” – that number could easily double.

But that is the sort of country we are now, isn’t it? A snivelling excuse for a once-civilised nation that is slithering into barbarism, where excrement fouls our beaches. A country that allows a vast, metastasising bureaucracy to gobble up billions of taxpayers’ money and can’t find a billion or so to buy radiotherapy and scanning equipment to prevent the avoidable loss of what could very well be 150,000 beloved human beings.

Which one of us can believe this sick state of affairs? I can’t. It’s monstrous. If Steve Barclay, allegedly the current Secretary of State for Health (hullo, Steve, anybody there?), doesn’t give the marvellous Prof Price and her colleagues the resources they need to start saving thousands of lives immediately, then they can forget about a war on cancer. There will be a war on the Government. We’ve had enough.

 

[DustyBin]

More evidence of the effects of all the COVID restrictions



I would like to know what all the locktivists have to say in response.

What is the NHS doing with our £136bn?

The cancer catastrophe is fast becoming one of the biggest avoidable tragedies of modern times and urgent action must be taken

www.telegraph.co.uk

The locktivists “get out” (so they think) appears to be that they had no choice, it was an unprecedented situation, nobody knew any better etc. etc. which is of course utter nonsense. If enough people wake up to what’s just happened they’ll then start blaming each other. “We followed the science”……

 

[Eyersey468]

More evidence of the effects of all the COVID restrictions



I would like to know what all the locktivists have to say in response.

What is the NHS doing with our £136bn?

The cancer catastrophe is fast becoming one of the biggest avoidable tragedies of modern times and urgent action must be taken

www.telegraph.co.uk

And it was so predictable

 

[bramling]

The locktivists “get out” (so they think) appears to be that they had no choice, it was an unprecedented situation, nobody knew any better etc. etc. which is of course utter nonsense. If enough people wake up to what’s just happened they’ll then start blaming each other. “We followed the science”……

Again, one can fully understand needing people to avoid the NHS during 2020. This absolutely shouldn’t have been the case during 2021. Another example of how the Covid response was allowed to drift for far too long.

I notice even the BBC are picking up on the developing issue with excess deaths. It possibly suits the NHS to keep Covid as a salient issue, as it helps mask this serious issue (just realised there’s a rather unfortunate pun there!).

 

[scarby]

The locktivists “get out” (so they think) appears to be that they had no choice, it was an unprecedented situation, nobody knew any better etc. etc. which is of course utter nonsense. If enough people wake up to what’s just happened they’ll then start blaming each other. “We followed the science”……

Obviously there was, as you imply, a choice, or several choices. Sweden for example chose one of them.

 

[Eyersey468]

I think the reason we threw away existing pandemic plans was the world panicked and once one country took an action, be it lockdown, wearing face nappies oops I mean masks, etc etc the next country felt they had to then the next and so on.

 

[greyman42]

Judging by my GP’s surgery, they still seem to be. The place remains absolutely plastered with Covid signage, including of course about mask wearing still being required, though they don’t seem to be actively enforcing it.

They can't enforce it.

 

[Hans]

Again, one can fully understand needing people to avoid the NHS during 2020. This absolutely shouldn’t have been the case during 2021. Another example of how the Covid response was allowed to drift for far too long.

I notice even the BBC are picking up on the developing issue with excess deaths. It possibly suits the NHS to keep Covid as a salient issue, as it helps mask this serious issue (just realised there’s a rather unfortunate pun there!).

I do not think there was any need to avoid the NHS during 2020, the hospitals were virtually empty from Mar onwards, I can only say that on first hand experience having had to spend 6 weeks in one of them for a sudden illness. There were more staff than patients. I imagine this was not a one off in this particular hospital, I also spent time in 2 other specialist hospitals and the situation was the same, although they were very specialised so probably unlikely to have been used for general health provision.

The staff would tell the patients how many postive covid patients there were in the hospital, it was always single figures.

The hospitals were emptied of the patients who most needed healthcare and dumped back into care homes, some to almost certain death, irrespective from covid or anything else. Those beds were never filled with people having covid. There are ONS stats for every hospital online for each week since Mar showing how many patients were in hospital with covid - the media would do well to read them, they will realise the hospitals were never overwhelmed, they were not even slightly busy.

So from that basis, the hysterical restrictions have caused the problems currently seen within the NHS, too many people were not treated or diagnosed of other illnesses since Mar 2020 when there was no need for them not to be. It is a shame it has taken over 2 years for many to realise this, many of us were predicting this from the very beginning. Ignorance is no defence, had any kind of analysis been done, both financial and health, it would have been very clear what problems would occur. Instead hysteria ruled following the 500k "prediction" by Neil Ferguson.

 

[Eyersey468]

I do not think there was any need to avoid the NHS during 2020, the hospitals were virtually empty from Mar onwards, I can only say that on first hand experience having had to spend 6 weeks in one of them for a sudden illness. There were more staff than patients. I imagine this was not a one off in this particular hospital, I also spent time in 2 other specialist hospitals and the situation was the same, although they were very specialised so probably unlikely to have been used for general health provision.

The staff would tell the patients how many postive covid patients there were in the hospital, it was always single figures.

The hospitals were emptied of the patients who most needed healthcare and dumped back into care homes, some to almost certain death, irrespective from covid or anything else. Those beds were never filled with people having covid. There are ONS stats for every hospital online for each week since Mar showing how many patients were in hospital with covid - the media would do well to read them, they will realise the hospitals were never overwhelmed, they were not even slighly busy.

So from that basis, the hysterical restrictions have caused the problems currently seen within the NHS, too many people were not treated or diagnosed of other illnesses since Mar 2020 when there was no need for them not to be. It is a shame it has taken over 2 years for may to realise this, many of us were predicting this from the very beginning. Ignorance is no defence, had any kind of analysis been done, both financial and health, it would have been very clear what problems would occur. Instead hysteria ruled following the 500k "prediction" by Neil Ferguson.

I agree there was a lot of hysteria

 

[Dent]

Again, one can fully understand needing people to avoid the NHS during 2020.

Avoiding getting necessary treatment in good time is never good medical advice.

 

[Busaholic]

I do not think there was any need to avoid the NHS during 2020, the hospitals were virtually empty from Mar onwards, I can only say that on first hand experience having had to spend 6 weeks in one of them for a sudden illness. There were more staff than patients. I imagine this was not a one off in this particular hospital, I also spent time in 2 other specialist hospitals and the situation was the same, although they were very specialised so probably unlikely to have been used for general health provision.

The staff would tell the patients how many postive covid patients there were in the hospital, it was always single figures.

I had a hernia operation in September 2020 in Cornwall's only proper hospital which went a bit wrong, so a Friday in-and-out job became a week's stay. During that time all visits were banned and my mobile phone packed up halfway through, so couldn't establish what was going on in the outside world. Eventually, after five changes of ward, I managed to get out, having been okay to leave the next day imo. Just before I left I found the real reason why I'd had to stay in so long (nothing to do with the op.) was because every time they checked my oxygen levels they were too low. As soon as they'd been checked, within one or two minutes they'd increased to a normal level. It quickly became apparent to me it was because the prelude to it all involved me being required to shuffle my bottom back in the bed and then raise my head, and this was incredibly difficult for me because of my MS and resulted in severe breathlessness immediately after. I tried to get this message over, but nobody listened! I'm not even sure my having MS was even noted at the bottom of my bed and, even if it was, they hadn't the faintest idea what difference it made.

Anyway, after three lots of scans spread over five days, one of which was aborted because the machine couldn't cope with the state of my anatomy and broke down, I overheard a conversation which suggested they were concerned my breathlessness was caused by Covid. Only then did someone take notice of my interjection to say no, it wasn't, and I planned to leave the hospital the following day unless I could be provided with a good reason why I shouldn't. Cutting short, I did get out the following evening. With so many stats flowing at the time, I was interested to later see that, during my week there, for the first and only time for months afterwards no patients diagnosed with Covid were recorded as present in the Royal Cornwall Hospital, so I might have become a solitary case!

Incidentally, I've never been listed as officially medically vulnerable so was never required to isolate, unlike my wife who was a cancer patient, but more recently was sent a box of 'flow tests' for covid with strict instructions that I had to report if I took a test, regardless of the result, and. if positive, had to inform my GP within twenty four hours and try to arrange to get 'treatment.' So far as I know, I haven't had covid by the way, and didn't report when my last test (after my dog walker tested positive) showed negative.

 

[Hans]

The ONS stats are there for everyone to read but they do not fit the agenda of the hysterical media, the social media warriors and of course the governments rhetoric, there will not the hundread of thousands of covid patients every in hospital.

 

[bramling]

Avoiding getting necessary treatment in good time is never good medical advice.

I was more thinking of less urgent stuff. For example, I know of someone who went in for something non-urgent in December 2020, caught Covid inside an NHS setting, and died from it (and in this instance it was from Covid, not with Covid). In that situation it certainly would seem to have been more sensible to wait until after taking the vaccine. Likewise I don't think it was unreasonable to, for example, ask us to avoid more risky activities during that time.

As with everything, this all went way to far, and for way too long.

 

[Hans]

I was more thinking of less urgent stuff. For example, I know of someone who went in for something non-urgent in December 2020, caught Covid, and died from it (and in this instance it was from Covid, not with Covid). Likewise I don't think it was unreasonable to, for example, ask us to avoid more risky activities during that time.

As with everything, this all went way to far, and for way too long.

Your suggestion would be a sensible one if the hospitals were overwhelmed, they were not. What constitutes a "risky activity"? People were being told to stop living their lives for a virus which for the majority gave them the sniffles for a couple of days. Every year flu, colds and respiratory viruses kill thousands of people, this will not stop, where was the hysteria and lockdowns then, or the don't go to hospital or avoid risky activites?

 

[johnnychips]

I must say, my new doctor’s surgery in Sheffield is excellent and picked up on a possible problem leading to a hospital test in three weeks. Fortunately I am old enough not to be embarrassed by having to discuss the firmness of my stools during an ‘online appointment’ with a crackly connection on a busy Northern train.

 

[bramling]

Your suggestion would be a sensible one if the hospitals were overwhelmed, they were not. What constitutes a "risky activity"? People were being told to stop living their lives for a virus which for the majority gave them the sniffles for a couple of days. Every year flu, colds and respiratory viruses kill thousands of people, this will not stop, where was the hysteria and lockdowns then, or the don't go to hospital or avoid risky activites?

The only issue with that is that we don’t know to what extent there’s a cause/effect relationship there, namely reducing demand for NHS services created capacity. Completely agree this shouldn’t have been at the expense of people with important issues, though.

To be fair to the powers that be, given the unknowns that existed during the first half of 2020 I’m not sure there was much option but to try and scale back on NHS demand. It should never have been allowed to become “business as usual” though, which now seems to be the case, especially in GP surgeries it seems.

 

[furlong]

This overview of some of the vaccine data was published this week by HART:

German Ministry of Health reports on vaccine injury – HART

The German Health Minister is an extremist in his views on the novel ‘vaccines’, promoting their use in children and claiming there have been no side effects. However, the German Ministry of Health appears to have some good actors among their staff who have reported on data from the Paul Ehrlich...

www.hartgroup.org

In its opinion:

The claims that there has been no harm are groundless on two counts. Firstly, the evidence of harm presented here and, secondly, the fact that the injections cause the body to produce spike protein which has been shown to cause much of the pathology of covid. Why would a protein that has caused harm in covid not cause harm when injected? What is more, the injected Wuhan spike protein contains sequences which cause a toxic shock syndrome like response that the Omicron spike does not have.

By every measure these injections have led to serious adverse reactions. It is still difficult to quantify exactly what the rate is but it is certainly well within the range at which other medications have been removed from the market. The public health authorities appear to have justified this harm to themselves on the basis that they claim they have saved millions of lives. However, the real world evidence shows that this claim is totally unsubstantiated.

 

[kristiang85]

This is quite a sobering article from The Spectator:

We’re at pandemic levels of death. Why is no one talking about it?

Excess deaths are at over 1,000 a week. Why isn't the government taking it seriously?

www.spectator.co.uk

At the peak of the lockdowns, thousands were dying every week. Newspaper front pages demanded action. But in the latest week’s data, covering the week to 12 August, some 1,082 more people than would be expected in a normal year died in the UK. These so-called ‘excess deaths’ have averaged 1,000 for 15 weeks of this year. Yet unlike Covid deaths, they are met with near silence.

But it isn’t Covid that’s causing these deaths anymore. In the latest figures, published by the ONS, just 6 per cent of English and Welsh deaths had anything to do with Covid. Of nearly 10,000 weekly deaths in England, just 561 mentioned the virus on the death certificate.

Most excess deaths now occur in private homes and previous studies have shown this is driven by the wealthy avoiding hospitals. That trend is continuing. In the week to 12 August, deaths at home were some 22 per cent above average, while only 9 per cent higher than expected in hospitals and 3 per cent higher in care homes. In fact, since the start of the year, there have been 6,000 fewer deaths than we’d expect in hospitals and care homes but over 17,000 more in people’s homes in England and Wales alone.

The problem is by no means confined to England. As is often the case when it comes to health, Scotland is faring worse. By the end of July, the rate of excess deaths among Scots was 28 per 100,000 people – 6 per cent higher than the south-west of England which is the second worst affected part of the country. NHS waiting times and backlogs are confounded in a country where poverty, addiction and preventable disease already run at extremely high levels.

What’s worrying doctors is just how unexpected these deaths are. We’ve just been through a pandemic with a virus that killed off the most medically vulnerable. The elderly were 70 times more likely to be killed by it. So given that, you might expect deaths to be displaced: people who probably would have died this year from old age and natural causes, dying a year or two earlier because of Covid. Shouldn’t we be seeing lower-than-average numbers of deaths?

One group with particularly high excess deaths in recent months has been 30-59-year-olds. Two of the leading causes of these deaths are heart attacks and diabetes, conditions that doctors fear got worse or went untreated during the lockdown years. People who need treatment now are struggling to get it. Waiting lists are larger than ever, it takes six minutes for 111 to answer your call – 20 times longer than it should — and getting an appointment with your GP is a total lottery. Unless these issues are addressed, these diseases will continue to go untreated.

Doctors and researchers are increasingly alarmed by the deaths but the government seems intent on ignoring the scandal. Until very recently government ministers seemed completely unaware of the problem. The Department of Health has finally commissioned an investigation, but for thousands of families, it is already too late.

Things are likely to get worse too. Every winter Britain suffers tens of thousands of excess deaths associated with cold weather, among the highest in Europe. In 2014/15, some 44,000 died in the winter months, last year it was 29,000 (excluding Covid) and the year before 24,000. And there’s no sign of those figures going down. The NHS is in a permanent winter crisis and that can only get worse.

For the past two years, there have been next to no serious cases of flu for reasons yet to be explained, Covid and lockdowns seemed to almost completely suppress it. But that doesn’t look to be the case this year. Australia acts as an early warning system for the northern hemisphere because it gets its flu season six months before us. They’ve just had their worst flu season in five years.

Given the deaths that have already occurred, the perpetually perilous state of the NHS, and the possible flu season, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that excess deaths will only continue to mount. The Department of Health investigation is a start, but getting to the bottom of the cause is only the beginning. How we prevent these deaths is the next question that no one seems able to answer.

 

[duncanp]

This is quite a sobering article from The Spectator:

We’re at pandemic levels of death. Why is no one talking about it?

Excess deaths are at over 1,000 a week. Why isn't the government taking it seriously?

www.spectator.co.uk

"Why isn't the government taking it seriously?" - because it's not COVID, and if it isn't COVID it doesn't matter.

Meanwhile, more evidence that those who questioned the negative effects of lockdown were silenced, and that no-one questioned the analysis produced by SAGE.

"We shouldn't have empowered the scientists in the way we did," he is quoted as saying.

Experts had too much power over Covid lockdowns, says Rishi Sunak

The ex-chancellor says ministers were banned from talking about negative effects of restrictions.

www.bbc.co.uk

Tory leadership: Rishi Sunak criticises Covid lockdown response​

Rishi Sunak has criticised the government's response to Covid - suggesting independent scientific advisers were given too much authority.
Mr Sunak - chancellor in the pandemic - told the Spectator magazine there had not been enough discussion about the negative side-effects of lockdowns.
He said he had felt "emotional" when he argued to keep schools in England open.
Mr Sunak said it had been "wrong" to scare people with campaign posters showing Covid patients on ventilators.
His comments come as the Conservative leadership contest enters its final days, with the results due on 5 September.
The winner of the contest - Mr Sunak or Foreign Secretary Liz Truss - will replace Boris Johnson as Conservative leader and as prime minister.
During the campaign both candidates have sought to highlight areas where they disagreed with the government in which they served, with Ms Truss saying she was opposed to the rise to National Insurance.
Mr Sunak and Ms Truss are due to take part in a hustings for Conservative Party members in Norwich on Thursday evening.

As chancellor from February 2020 to July 2022, Mr Sunak played a key role in the government's response to coronavirus, including establishing the furlough scheme.
Speaking to the Spectator, Mr Sunak insisted he did not want to blame individuals but said he believes a series of mistakes were made by ministers during the pandemic.
He said ministers were not given enough information to scrutinise analysis produced by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) - a group of independent experts advising the government.
"We shouldn't have empowered the scientists in the way we did," he is quoted as saying.
Mr Sunak says ministers should have talked more about what he described as the "trade-offs" of lockdowns, such as NHS backlogs and the impact on children's education.
"The script was not to ever acknowledge them. The script was: oh there's no trade-off, because doing this for our health is good for the economy.
"Those meetings were literally me around that table, just fighting. It was incredibly uncomfortable every single time.
"I was like, 'forget about the economy - surely we can all agree that kids not being in school is a major nightmare.' There was a big silence afterwards. It was the first time someone had said it. I was so furious."
Mr Sunak's comments come after a report from MPs last year said the UK should have acted sooner to stop Covid spreading early in the pandemic.
Meanwhile, the government has set up an independent public inquiry into its handling of Covid.

 

[Razorblades]

A suspicious or suggestible individual could worry themselves by drawing troubling conclusions from the previous two posts (Edit: but one) and linking the contents of the pieces.

 

[350401]

The BBC are now reporting on the Sunak story, and their coverage of it is disgusting. Within 3 lines they are attempting to discredit the story, and are quoting Cummings - a hypocritical rule breaker, who isn't an elected politician or even a career civil servant. At no point do they mention the key element of Sunak's comments - that SAGE minutes were doctored to remove dissenting voices. The level of pro-lockdown bias from the BBC here is quite breaktaking. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62664537

 

[duncanp]

The level of pro-lockdown bias from the BBC here is quite breaktaking. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62664537

Fixed that for you.

The quote is the article

"At every point, ministers made collective decisions which considered a wide range of expert advice available at the time in order to protect public health."

is a load of old cobblers.

Decisions were made behind closed door in a committee of four people (Boris Johnson, Rishi Sunak, Michael Gove and Matt Hancock) and presented to the cabinet as a fait accompli. The cabinet were not consulted beforehand, nor were they given the evidence presented to them by SAGE, nor did anyone question in any meaningful way the lies and misleading information thrown at them by SAGE.

The truth is slowly starting to come out now, so perhaps it is no wonder that Boris Johnson is leaving office and letting his successor take the flak for the consequences of lockdown.

 

[Eyersey468]

The BBC are now reporting on the Sunak story, and their coverage of it is disgusting. Within 3 lines they are attempting to discredit the story, and are quoting Cummings - a hypocritical rule breaker, who isn't an elected politician or even a career civil servant. At no point do they mention the key element of Sunak's comments - that SAGE minutes were doctored to remove dissenting voices. The level of pro-lockdown bias from the BBC here is quite breaktaking. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62664537

It is no surprise to me that yet again the BBC are showing a pro lockdown bias.

 

[Razorblades]

It is no surprise to me that yet again the BBC are showing a pro lockdown bias.

The BBC is not to be trusted regarding its impartiality. It always causes a raised eyebrow when I see things like this strap-line on a local BBC radio channel:

'Trusted local news, information and advice, plus Make A Difference at breakfast with ...' (my italics)

There's something very Orwellian about the use of the word 'Trusted.'

 

[kez19]

The BBC are now reporting on the Sunak story, and their coverage of it is disgusting. Within 3 lines they are attempting to discredit the story, and are quoting Cummings - a hypocritical rule breaker, who isn't an elected politician or even a career civil servant. At no point do they mention the key element of Sunak's comments - that SAGE minutes were doctored to remove dissenting voices. The level of pro-lockdown bias from the BBC here is quite breaktaking. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-62664537

It doesn’t surprise me, wait Dominic Cummings that guy the media were in hysterics he drove blindly up north? That Dominic Cummings? It makes you wonder though as in how much the media knew behind the scenes but played up to the gallery? I think the turn of the media is just around the corner but I wonder how much the likes of the BBC Sky etc will try to cover up themselves here? There is no innocent parties in this, from politicians to SAGE and to the media, let’s remember they played with peoples lives (actions have consequences), their actions have had consequences on us, maybe this is karma biting back.

As for the Dominic Cummings story does the media not realise the hypocrites they are? They hounded him for wrongdoing but suddenly he is a saint to the media? More to this I reckon.

The BBC is not to be trusted regarding its impartiality. It always causes a raised eyebrow when I see things like this strap-line on a local BBC radio channel:

'Trusted local news, information and advice, plus Make A Difference at breakfast with ...' (my italics)

There's something very Orwellian about the use of the word 'Trusted.'

Whilst I agree with you on the BBC but Sky and ITV aren’t any better either (STV in my area too), they all have an agenda as someone mentioned before are we getting news or is it views from the correspondents?

 

[Eyersey468]

It doesn’t surprise me, wait Dominic Cummings that guy the media were in hysterics he drove blindly up north? That Dominic Cummings? It makes you wonder though as in how much the media knew behind the scenes but played up to the gallery? I think the turn of the media is just around the corner but I wonder how much the likes of the BBC Sky etc will try to cover up themselves here? There is no innocent parties in this, from politicians to SAGE and to the media, let’s remember they played with peoples lives (actions have consequences), their actions have had consequences on us, maybe this is karma biting back.

As for the Dominic Cummings story does the media not realise the hypocrites they are? They hounded him for wrongdoing but suddenly he is a saint to the media? More to this I reckon.



Whilst I agree with you on the BBC but Sky and ITV aren’t any better either (STV in my area too), they all have an agenda as someone mentioned before are we getting news or is it views from the correspondents?

Completely agree

 

[Razorblades]

Whilst I agree with you on the BBC but Sky and ITV aren’t any better either (STV in my area too), they all have an agenda as someone mentioned before are we getting news or is it views from the correspondents?

I completely agree, and under your present leader, STV will be saddled with one heck of an agenda.

 

[kez19]

I completely agree, and under your present leader, STV will be saddled with one heck of an agenda.

It’s odd to me, I use to watch both BBC Scotland and STV, I already see the other agenda (I think I know the one you are thinking of), but to me it comes across as one sided (look at Scotland Tonight and some of their reviewers they have on that’s even an eye opener), STV are more open in who they support and on their social media it’s more obvious but other than deflect to Westminster. (ie some devolved powers are in charge here not Westminster but yes let’s continue the blame game)

Unrelated to the recent news but look up some STV programming from about 7 or so years ago… we celebrated Hogmanay with the First Minister (yes STV had a love in show), I’m surprised how they managed to get aired let alone lack of criticism for it.

 

[Markdvdman]

I wish Sky News UK was as good as Sky News Australia! They are not frightened to question things!!