The 62-year-old father of two did not contract the coronavirus. He died on 9 October 2020 after being repeatedly refused a face-to-face doctor’s appointment during the pandemic – only to be told that an emergency operation to remove his gallbladder had been delayed due to spiraling NHS waiting lists. His sudden death, in excruciating pain, was completely avoidable. As Mrs. King told me at the time: “To the decision makers, it’s just ‘collateral damage,’ but to me, it’s the love of my life.” When journalists like me heard these stories and warned that the cure to lockdown might be worse than the disease, we were accused of being hitmen intent on prioritizing the economy before saving lives. Scientists who dared to question the severity of the restrictions were, as Lord Sumption put it at the time, “persecuted like Galileo”. Falsely labeled ‘Covid deniers’ simply for questioning some of the slavishly followed ‘science’ were subjected to terrible online abuse from a bunch of armchair experts who claimed to know better. Professor Robert Dingwall faced career ‘cancellation’ for refusing to drink the zero Covid Kool-Aid, as did Professor Carl Heneghan, Professor Sunetra Gupta and leading oncologist Professor Karol Sikora. However, we now learn that they were right to put their concerns ahead of Sage’s pseudo-socialist groupthink. Official figures now show that the effects of the lockdown may be killing more people than are currently dying from Covid. An analysis by the Daily Telegraph’s brilliant science editor, Sarah Knapton (another figure challenged for challenging the pro-lockdown orthodoxy) found that around 1,000 more people than usual are dying each week from conditions other than coronavirus. Figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on Tuesday showed excess deaths were 14.4 per cent higher than the five-year average, equivalent to 1,350 more deaths than usual in the week ending August 5 . Although 469 deaths are linked to Covid, the remaining 881 are unexplained. Since the start of June, the ONS has recorded almost 10,000 more deaths than the five-year average – around 1,086 a week – none of them linked to coronavirus. This number is more than three times the number of people who died from Covid in the same period – 2,811. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has called for an investigation into the data amid concern that the deaths are being linked to delays and delayed treatment for conditions such as cancer, diabetes and heart disease. Study the statistics, by all means, but the DHSC might be better off just talking to someone like Ms King – along with many of the country’s leading oncologists and cardiologists. In July, I visited Bart’s for an event to mark the hospital’s 900th anniversary next year – and the doctors I met were in no doubt about the detrimental effect successive lockdowns were having on non-Covid patients. As breast cancer surgeon Laura Johnson explained: “It’s not that patient diagnoses were lost, but unfortunately because a lot of people didn’t go to hospital. “Then they present now, 18 months later, with more advanced disease. Almost half of our cancer patients need chemotherapy before surgery, whereas before this percentage was much lower. And that’s because they present a bigger, more aggressive, more advanced cancer.” Horror stories are everywhere: from people dying needlessly at home like Mr. King, to elderly patients waiting 40 hours for ambulances, to cancer patients now dying because they missed appointments during lockdown or didn’t want to be a burden. It is tempting to blame this on the NHS which urgently needs reform – and this is certainly part of the explanation. We all know how staff shortages – again, exacerbated by the pandemic – are crippling the system. But this is not simply the result of a lack of resources. Health care spending has risen sharply as a percentage of GDP in recent years. The nettle to understand is that these figures suggest that the country is facing a growing health crisis that has been caused by our overreaction to the pandemic – policies of terror that have kept people indoors, scared them away from hospitals and deprived them of treatment . These excess deaths may well turn out to be a direct consequence of the decision to lock down the country in order to control a virus that has always been a serious threat only to the elderly and vulnerable. If a more proportional approach, similar to Sweden’s, had been adopted, then would we be in this mess right now? Perhaps only a government inquiry will be able to definitively answer that question, but what is certain now is that the debate over the severity of the lockdown has never been about economics over lives – as pro-shutdown zealots would have it – but for lives against lives. At the beginning of the pandemic, overreacting to the virus might have been forgivable. We didn’t know much about Sars-CoV-2, and any hope for a vaccine seemed like a distant fantasy. But it quickly became clear that many of the measures were disproportionate and poorly targeted – and that little thought was given to alternatives, such as the focused protection system promoted by those who signed the Great Barrington Declaration, in which those truly vulnerable to Covid were right armored. Let’s not forget that in the last quarter of 2020, the average age of those dying with and from Covid was estimated at 82.4 years, while the risk of dying from it if you were under 60 was less than 0.5 percent. Who wouldn’t take those odds now compared to being diagnosed with cancer, circulatory or cardiovascular disease and having to wait months for treatment after the pandemic? None of this came as a surprise to those organizations such as the British Heart Foundation or the Stroke Foundation, which had predicted a sharp rise in deaths because “people haven’t had their routine appointments for years now”. And let’s not even get started on the mental health toll borne by the panicked Government. Or the negative effect the work-from-home edicts have had on our already sedentary lifestyles, alcohol consumption and waistlines. Not to mention the adverse effects on the education of a Covid generation whose schools and universities should, in hindsight, never, ever have closed. The World Health Organization said at the time that the Great Barrington Declaration “lacked a scientific basis”, but almost three years after the start of the pandemic, there has been precious little analysis of whether the series of Covid restrictions either served the collective good or actually saved lives in the round – compared to the lives now being lost as a result. These numbers are not just statistics – they are people’s husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, daughters and sons. The horrible truth is that many of these people would probably still be here today if it weren’t for the lockdowns. lockdowns that seemingly did little to stop tens of thousands of people dying from Covid in the UK. We stayed home to ‘protect the NHS’. It turns out the NHS isn’t there now to protect us.
title: “Lockdown Fanatics Cannot Avoid Responsibility For This Scandal Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-20” author: “Bonnie Cunanan”
The 62-year-old father of two did not contract the coronavirus. He died on 9 October 2020 after being repeatedly refused a face-to-face doctor’s appointment during the pandemic – only to be told that an emergency operation to remove his gallbladder had been delayed due to spiraling NHS waiting lists. His sudden death, in excruciating pain, was completely avoidable. As Mrs. King told me at the time: “To the decision makers, it’s just ‘collateral damage,’ but to me, it’s the love of my life.” When journalists like me heard these stories and warned that the cure to lockdown might be worse than the disease, we were accused of being hitmen intent on prioritizing the economy before saving lives. Scientists who dared to question the severity of the restrictions were, as Lord Sumption put it at the time, “persecuted like Galileo”. Falsely labeled ‘Covid deniers’ simply for questioning some of the slavishly followed ‘science’ were subjected to terrible online abuse from a bunch of armchair experts who claimed to know better. Professor Robert Dingwall faced career ‘cancellation’ for refusing to drink the zero Covid Kool-Aid, as did Professor Carl Heneghan, Professor Sunetra Gupta and leading oncologist Professor Karol Sikora. However, we now learn that they were right to put their concerns ahead of Sage’s pseudo-socialist groupthink. Official figures now show that the effects of the lockdown may be killing more people than are currently dying from Covid. An analysis by the Daily Telegraph’s brilliant science editor, Sarah Knapton (another figure challenged for challenging the pro-lockdown orthodoxy) found that around 1,000 more people than usual are dying each week from conditions other than coronavirus. Figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on Tuesday showed excess deaths were 14.4 per cent higher than the five-year average, equivalent to 1,350 more deaths than usual in the week ending August 5 . Although 469 deaths are linked to Covid, the remaining 881 are unexplained. Since the start of June, the ONS has recorded almost 10,000 more deaths than the five-year average – around 1,086 a week – none of them linked to coronavirus. This number is more than three times the number of people who died from Covid in the same period – 2,811. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has called for an investigation into the data amid concern that the deaths are being linked to delays and delayed treatment for conditions such as cancer, diabetes and heart disease. Study the statistics, by all means, but the DHSC might be better off just talking to someone like Ms King – along with many of the country’s leading oncologists and cardiologists. In July, I visited Bart’s for an event to mark the hospital’s 900th anniversary next year – and the doctors I met were in no doubt about the detrimental effect successive lockdowns were having on non-Covid patients. As breast cancer surgeon Laura Johnson explained: “It’s not that patient diagnoses were lost, but unfortunately because a lot of people didn’t go to hospital. “Then they present now, 18 months later, with more advanced disease. Almost half of our cancer patients need chemotherapy before surgery, whereas before this percentage was much lower. And that’s because they present a bigger, more aggressive, more advanced cancer.” Horror stories are everywhere: from people dying needlessly at home like Mr. King, to elderly patients waiting 40 hours for ambulances, to cancer patients now dying because they missed appointments during lockdown or didn’t want to be a burden. It is tempting to blame this on the NHS which urgently needs reform – and this is certainly part of the explanation. We all know how staff shortages – again, exacerbated by the pandemic – are crippling the system. But this is not simply the result of a lack of resources. Health care spending has risen sharply as a percentage of GDP in recent years. The nettle to understand is that these figures suggest that the country is facing a growing health crisis that has been caused by our overreaction to the pandemic – policies of terror that have kept people indoors, scared them away from hospitals and deprived them of treatment . These excess deaths may well turn out to be a direct consequence of the decision to lock down the country in order to control a virus that has always been a serious threat only to the elderly and vulnerable. If a more proportional approach, similar to Sweden’s, had been adopted, then would we be in this mess right now? Perhaps only a government inquiry will be able to definitively answer that question, but what is certain now is that the debate over the severity of the lockdown has never been about economics over lives – as pro-shutdown zealots would have it – but for lives against lives. At the beginning of the pandemic, overreacting to the virus might have been forgivable. We didn’t know much about Sars-CoV-2, and any hope for a vaccine seemed like a distant fantasy. But it quickly became clear that many of the measures were disproportionate and poorly targeted – and that little thought was given to alternatives, such as the focused protection system promoted by those who signed the Great Barrington Declaration, in which those truly vulnerable to Covid were right armored. Let’s not forget that in the last quarter of 2020, the average age of those dying with and from Covid was estimated at 82.4 years, while the risk of dying from it if you were under 60 was less than 0.5 percent. Who wouldn’t take those odds now compared to being diagnosed with cancer, circulatory or cardiovascular disease and having to wait months for treatment after the pandemic? None of this came as a surprise to those organizations such as the British Heart Foundation or the Stroke Foundation, which had predicted a sharp rise in deaths because “people haven’t had their routine appointments for years now”. And let’s not even get started on the mental health toll borne by the panicked Government. Or the negative effect the work-from-home edicts have had on our already sedentary lifestyles, alcohol consumption and waistlines. Not to mention the adverse effects on the education of a Covid generation whose schools and universities should, in hindsight, never, ever have closed. The World Health Organization said at the time that the Great Barrington Declaration “lacked a scientific basis”, but almost three years after the start of the pandemic, there has been precious little analysis of whether the series of Covid restrictions either served the collective good or actually saved lives in the round – compared to the lives now being lost as a result. These numbers are not just statistics – they are people’s husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, daughters and sons. The horrible truth is that many of these people would probably still be here today if it weren’t for the lockdowns. lockdowns that seemingly did little to stop tens of thousands of people dying from Covid in the UK. We stayed home to ‘protect the NHS’. It turns out the NHS isn’t there now to protect us.
title: “Lockdown Fanatics Cannot Avoid Responsibility For This Scandal Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-10-31” author: “John Gaines”
The 62-year-old father of two did not contract the coronavirus. He died on 9 October 2020 after being repeatedly refused a face-to-face doctor’s appointment during the pandemic – only to be told that an emergency operation to remove his gallbladder had been delayed due to spiraling NHS waiting lists. His sudden death, in excruciating pain, was completely avoidable. As Mrs. King told me at the time: “To the decision makers, it’s just ‘collateral damage,’ but to me, it’s the love of my life.” When journalists like me heard these stories and warned that the cure to lockdown might be worse than the disease, we were accused of being hitmen intent on prioritizing the economy before saving lives. Scientists who dared to question the severity of the restrictions were, as Lord Sumption put it at the time, “persecuted like Galileo”. Falsely labeled ‘Covid deniers’ simply for questioning some of the slavishly followed ‘science’ were subjected to terrible online abuse from a bunch of armchair experts who claimed to know better. Professor Robert Dingwall faced career ‘cancellation’ for refusing to drink the zero Covid Kool-Aid, as did Professor Carl Heneghan, Professor Sunetra Gupta and leading oncologist Professor Karol Sikora. However, we now learn that they were right to put their concerns ahead of Sage’s pseudo-socialist groupthink. Official figures now show that the effects of the lockdown may be killing more people than are currently dying from Covid. An analysis by the Daily Telegraph’s brilliant science editor, Sarah Knapton (another figure challenged for challenging the pro-lockdown orthodoxy) found that around 1,000 more people than usual are dying each week from conditions other than coronavirus. Figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on Tuesday showed excess deaths were 14.4 per cent higher than the five-year average, equivalent to 1,350 more deaths than usual in the week ending August 5 . Although 469 deaths are linked to Covid, the remaining 881 are unexplained. Since the start of June, the ONS has recorded almost 10,000 more deaths than the five-year average – around 1,086 a week – none of them linked to coronavirus. This number is more than three times the number of people who died from Covid in the same period – 2,811. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has called for an investigation into the data amid concern that the deaths are being linked to delays and delayed treatment for conditions such as cancer, diabetes and heart disease. Study the statistics, by all means, but the DHSC might be better off just talking to someone like Ms King – along with many of the country’s leading oncologists and cardiologists. In July, I visited Bart’s for an event to mark the hospital’s 900th anniversary next year – and the doctors I met were in no doubt about the detrimental effect successive lockdowns were having on non-Covid patients. As breast cancer surgeon Laura Johnson explained: “It’s not that patient diagnoses were lost, but unfortunately because a lot of people didn’t go to hospital. “Then they present now, 18 months later, with more advanced disease. Almost half of our cancer patients need chemotherapy before surgery, whereas before this percentage was much lower. And that’s because they present a bigger, more aggressive, more advanced cancer.” Horror stories are everywhere: from people dying needlessly at home like Mr. King, to elderly patients waiting 40 hours for ambulances, to cancer patients now dying because they missed appointments during lockdown or didn’t want to be a burden. It is tempting to blame this on the NHS which urgently needs reform – and this is certainly part of the explanation. We all know how staff shortages – again, exacerbated by the pandemic – are crippling the system. But this is not simply the result of a lack of resources. Health care spending has risen sharply as a percentage of GDP in recent years. The nettle to understand is that these figures suggest that the country is facing a growing health crisis that has been caused by our overreaction to the pandemic – policies of terror that have kept people indoors, scared them away from hospitals and deprived them of treatment . These excess deaths may well turn out to be a direct consequence of the decision to lock down the country in order to control a virus that has always been a serious threat only to the elderly and vulnerable. If a more proportional approach, similar to Sweden’s, had been adopted, then would we be in this mess right now? Perhaps only a government inquiry will be able to definitively answer that question, but what is certain now is that the debate over the severity of the lockdown has never been about economics over lives – as pro-shutdown zealots would have it – but for lives against lives. At the beginning of the pandemic, overreacting to the virus might have been forgivable. We didn’t know much about Sars-CoV-2, and any hope for a vaccine seemed like a distant fantasy. But it quickly became clear that many of the measures were disproportionate and poorly targeted – and that little thought was given to alternatives, such as the focused protection system promoted by those who signed the Great Barrington Declaration, in which those truly vulnerable to Covid were right armored. Let’s not forget that in the last quarter of 2020, the average age of those dying with and from Covid was estimated at 82.4 years, while the risk of dying from it if you were under 60 was less than 0.5 percent. Who wouldn’t take those odds now compared to being diagnosed with cancer, circulatory or cardiovascular disease and having to wait months for treatment after the pandemic? None of this came as a surprise to those organizations such as the British Heart Foundation or the Stroke Foundation, which had predicted a sharp rise in deaths because “people haven’t had their routine appointments for years now”. And let’s not even get started on the mental health toll borne by the panicked Government. Or the negative effect the work-from-home edicts have had on our already sedentary lifestyles, alcohol consumption and waistlines. Not to mention the adverse effects on the education of a Covid generation whose schools and universities should, in hindsight, never, ever have closed. The World Health Organization said at the time that the Great Barrington Declaration “lacked a scientific basis”, but almost three years after the start of the pandemic, there has been precious little analysis of whether the series of Covid restrictions either served the collective good or actually saved lives in the round – compared to the lives now being lost as a result. These numbers are not just statistics – they are people’s husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, daughters and sons. The horrible truth is that many of these people would probably still be here today if it weren’t for the lockdowns. lockdowns that seemingly did little to stop tens of thousands of people dying from Covid in the UK. We stayed home to ‘protect the NHS’. It turns out the NHS isn’t there now to protect us.
title: “Lockdown Fanatics Cannot Avoid Responsibility For This Scandal Klmat” ShowToc: true date: “2022-11-30” author: “Kelly Deem”
The 62-year-old father of two did not contract the coronavirus. He died on 9 October 2020 after being repeatedly refused a face-to-face doctor’s appointment during the pandemic – only to be told that an emergency operation to remove his gallbladder had been delayed due to spiraling NHS waiting lists. His sudden death, in excruciating pain, was completely avoidable. As Mrs. King told me at the time: “To the decision makers, it’s just ‘collateral damage,’ but to me, it’s the love of my life.” When journalists like me heard these stories and warned that the cure to lockdown might be worse than the disease, we were accused of being hitmen intent on prioritizing the economy before saving lives. Scientists who dared to question the severity of the restrictions were, as Lord Sumption put it at the time, “persecuted like Galileo”. Falsely labeled ‘Covid deniers’ simply for questioning some of the slavishly followed ‘science’ were subjected to terrible online abuse from a bunch of armchair experts who claimed to know better. Professor Robert Dingwall faced career ‘cancellation’ for refusing to drink the zero Covid Kool-Aid, as did Professor Carl Heneghan, Professor Sunetra Gupta and leading oncologist Professor Karol Sikora. However, we now learn that they were right to put their concerns ahead of Sage’s pseudo-socialist groupthink. Official figures now show that the effects of the lockdown may be killing more people than are currently dying from Covid. An analysis by the Daily Telegraph’s brilliant science editor, Sarah Knapton (another figure challenged for challenging the pro-lockdown orthodoxy) found that around 1,000 more people than usual are dying each week from conditions other than coronavirus. Figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on Tuesday showed excess deaths were 14.4 per cent higher than the five-year average, equivalent to 1,350 more deaths than usual in the week ending August 5 . Although 469 deaths are linked to Covid, the remaining 881 are unexplained. Since the start of June, the ONS has recorded almost 10,000 more deaths than the five-year average – around 1,086 a week – none of them linked to coronavirus. This number is more than three times the number of people who died from Covid in the same period – 2,811. The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has called for an investigation into the data amid concern that the deaths are being linked to delays and delayed treatment for conditions such as cancer, diabetes and heart disease. Study the statistics, by all means, but the DHSC might be better off just talking to someone like Ms King – along with many of the country’s leading oncologists and cardiologists. In July, I visited Bart’s for an event to mark the hospital’s 900th anniversary next year – and the doctors I met were in no doubt about the detrimental effect successive lockdowns were having on non-Covid patients. As breast cancer surgeon Laura Johnson explained: “It’s not that patient diagnoses were lost, but unfortunately because a lot of people didn’t go to hospital. “Then they present now, 18 months later, with more advanced disease. Almost half of our cancer patients need chemotherapy before surgery, whereas before this percentage was much lower. And that’s because they present a bigger, more aggressive, more advanced cancer.” Horror stories are everywhere: from people dying needlessly at home like Mr. King, to elderly patients waiting 40 hours for ambulances, to cancer patients now dying because they missed appointments during lockdown or didn’t want to be a burden. It is tempting to blame this on the NHS which urgently needs reform – and this is certainly part of the explanation. We all know how staff shortages – again, exacerbated by the pandemic – are crippling the system. But this is not simply the result of a lack of resources. Health care spending has risen sharply as a percentage of GDP in recent years. The nettle to understand is that these figures suggest that the country is facing a growing health crisis that has been caused by our overreaction to the pandemic – policies of terror that have kept people indoors, scared them away from hospitals and deprived them of treatment . These excess deaths may well turn out to be a direct consequence of the decision to lock down the country in order to control a virus that has always been a serious threat only to the elderly and vulnerable. If a more proportional approach, similar to Sweden’s, had been adopted, then would we be in this mess right now? Perhaps only a government inquiry will be able to definitively answer that question, but what is certain now is that the debate over the severity of the lockdown has never been about economics over lives – as pro-shutdown zealots would have it – but for lives against lives. At the beginning of the pandemic, overreacting to the virus might have been forgivable. We didn’t know much about Sars-CoV-2, and any hope for a vaccine seemed like a distant fantasy. But it quickly became clear that many of the measures were disproportionate and poorly targeted – and that little thought was given to alternatives, such as the focused protection system promoted by those who signed the Great Barrington Declaration, in which those truly vulnerable to Covid were right armored. Let’s not forget that in the last quarter of 2020, the average age of those dying with and from Covid was estimated at 82.4 years, while the risk of dying from it if you were under 60 was less than 0.5 percent. Who wouldn’t take those odds now compared to being diagnosed with cancer, circulatory or cardiovascular disease and having to wait months for treatment after the pandemic? None of this came as a surprise to those organizations such as the British Heart Foundation or the Stroke Foundation, which had predicted a sharp rise in deaths because “people haven’t had their routine appointments for years now”. And let’s not even get started on the mental health toll borne by the panicked Government. Or the negative effect the work-from-home edicts have had on our already sedentary lifestyles, alcohol consumption and waistlines. Not to mention the adverse effects on the education of a Covid generation whose schools and universities should, in hindsight, never, ever have closed. The World Health Organization said at the time that the Great Barrington Declaration “lacked a scientific basis”, but almost three years after the start of the pandemic, there has been precious little analysis of whether the series of Covid restrictions either served the collective good or actually saved lives in the round – compared to the lives now being lost as a result. These numbers are not just statistics – they are people’s husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, daughters and sons. The horrible truth is that many of these people would probably still be here today if it weren’t for the lockdowns. lockdowns that seemingly did little to stop tens of thousands of people dying from Covid in the UK. We stayed home to ‘protect the NHS’. It turns out the NHS isn’t there now to protect us.
