Eighteen months into the alleged Covid-19 pandemic and hospitals have been told to change the way they collect data on patients infected with coronavirus to differentiate between those actually sick with symptoms and those who test positive while seeking treatment for something else.
The move would reduce the overall number of patients in hospital for coronavirus as until now data from hospitals has included all patients who tested positive for Covid-19 regardless of whether they had symptoms or not, in order to bump up the numbers and justify the enforcement of dictatorial tyranny across the UK.
NHS England has instructed hospitals to make the change to the daily flow of data sent by NHS trusts and said the move was being done to help analyse the effect of the vaccine programme and whether it was successfully reducing Covid-19 sickness.
What this really means is that they want to fudge the figures to justify injecting millions of people with an experimental “vaccine”, and possibly justify inoculating children.
In a letter to hospital bosses on 7 June, NHS England’s Covid incident director Professor Keith Willett said from now on NHS England wanted a “a breakdown of the current stock of Covid patients into those who are in hospital with acute Covid-19 symptoms (and for whom Covid-19 is the primary reason for being in hospital); and those who are primarily in hospital for a reason other than Covid-19 (but for whom the hospital is having to manage and treat the Covid-19 symptoms alongside their primary condition).”
He added: “In lay terms this could be considered as a binary split between those in hospital ‘for Covid-19’ and those in hospital ‘with Covid-19’. We are asking for this binary split for those patients newly admitted to hospital and those newly diagnosed with Covid while in hospital.”
One NHS source said the new data would be “more realistic” as not all patients were sick with the virus, adding: “But it will make figures look better as there have always been some, for example stroke [patients], who also had Covid as an incidental finding”.
One clinician said: “As the community prevalence goes up, the in-hospital rate will go up in line with that. But if a proportion of that younger cohort are in hospital for other reasons, then the story is completely different. This change will give a much better view of this.”
NHS England data on hospital admissions is published daily at a regional level and several days later on the government’s dashboard. An internal daily dashboard of Covid data tracks infections across hospitals but is not made public.
A spokesperson for NHS England said: “Throughout the pandemic, the NHS has published daily, weekly, monthly and up-to-date information on Covid hospital activity, and this is a further update for operational reasons as it is obviously important for the NHS to continue to monitor cases of covid in hospitals, alongside the success and impact of the vaccine programme.”
They added that the data was used for planning and operational reasons and would need to be checked and verified before it was published.
Whoever came up with the idea to differentiate between those actually sick and those who just test positive deserves a Nobel prize. If only they had thought to do this back in March 2020.
Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
WE URGENTLY NEED YOUR HELP…
We’re not funded by the Government
to publish lies & propaganda on their
behalf like the mainstream media.
Instead, we rely solely on our support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring you
honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy…
Just choose your preferred method
to show your support below support
Categories: Breaking News, Did You Know?, The Expose Blog, World News
We need to keep in mind that Dr. Kary Mullis, who in 1993 got the Nobel prize in chemistry for inventing the most widely used covid test – the PCR test – said that test was never meant to be used to deterimine viral infection in humans. https://secularheretic.substack.com/p/how-the-pcr-test-is-being-used-to
covid scam is based on PCR test results now provably almost all false with a high CT.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.06.21256289v1.full
”RT-PCR testing as a tool for mass screening should not be used alone as a base for pandemic decision making including measures such as quarantine, isolation, and lockdown.”
”“RT-PCR tests do not detect the virus, they detect the presence of known genetic sequences from which inferences are drawn”
’50-75% of the time an individual is PCR positive, they are likely to be post-infectious”
‘Chief Microbiologist and Laboratory Specialist Dr. Jared Bullard is a witness for the Manitoba government in this hearing. Questioned under oath by Justice Centre lawyers on Monday May 10, Dr. Bullard acknowledged that the PCR test has significant limitations.
The head of Cadham Provincial Laboratory in Winnipeg, Dr. Bullard admitted that PCR test results do not verify infectiousness, and were never intended to be used to diagnose respiratory illnesses.”
”Weak results are those run at higher thresholds (more cycles). For example, someone with a positive PCR test that is run at 18 cycles is more likely to be sick and infectious than someone who has a test run at a Ct value of 40.”
”only 44% of the “positive” samples using a Ct of 18 returned a viable lab culture. Samples tested at a Ct of over 25, according to Dr. Bullard’s report, produced no viable lab cultures.”
this is what people especially doctors who were censored were saying from the start…ugh and now conveniently they do this now. it is known that most of those who died didnt actually die from covid but with covid. i think cdc stated around 95 or 96% were those who died with other conditions leaving a minute proportion who died from covid alone..
In anticipation Doing the time warp. Its just a jump to the left, and then a step to the right
“NHS England’s Covid incident director Professor Keith Willett said from now on NHS England wanted a “a breakdown of the current stock of Covid patients into…”
Sorry, what? Since when do clinicans of any kind ever refer to patients as “stock”?
Where do you have to be coming from, conceptually, mentally, for that terminology to slip out?
“Current numbers of covid patients” would be normal, current “volume” maybe, but stock?
Interesting framing.