Published On: Sun, Mar 29th, 2020

Letting flu do the dirty work: the vast potential to misrepresent death as due to Covid-19

Did the reader notice that three figure “Covid-19” daily death rates started to happen just as soon as the Coronavirus Bill received Royal Assent? On two days there was a number in the 100s, and then on the third day there was a “death toll” that was in the 200s to nudge the total number over 1000 just in time for the Sunday morning politics programmes. It surely is not a coincidence given how the Coronavirus Bill removes the requirement for a coroner’s inquest into Covid-19 death to be held without a jury. To explain: when a death is from a notifiable disease, which is what Covid-19 has been designated, then a jury is a feature of a coroner’s inquest. Covid-19 has been exempted, and it stinks to high heaven. It means that there is less scrutiny for a death that has been signed off as Covid-19 – and, as such, less deterrence to try and pass off a death as attributable to Covid-19 that could be discerned, under independent examination, to have another cause.

As we will see, treating Covid-19 as a notifiable disease in the hospital means it grabs all the headlines when it creates a death, but treating it as a non-notifiable disease at the post mortem investigation means that reality cannot upset the sensation. It stinks on hot ice.

(And if the reader doesn’t think that there aren’t any pathologists or coroners in the country corrupt enough for such a caper, then please read the volumes of FBEL coverage of various enquiries into deaths occurring at terror incidents).

In previous articles we’ve already investigated two ways that Covid-19 could be death by pneumonia ultimately brought on by prescribed medicine (here and here). In this article we’re going to look at the idea that a change in the way of recording death in the UK has created a situation where the humble flu, or other viruses and coronaviruses doing their usual stuff (i.e. causing respiratory illness), can be misrepresented as Covid-19.

To begin we need to consider the contribution of a Dr John Lee, a recently retired professor of pathology and a former NHS consultant pathologist writing for The Spectator. This piece of writing is by now well known by those looking for answers about so-called Covid-19, but hopefully our reading of it will create new significance.

Lee explains in his piece that if a disease is not a notifiable one it won’t be used to account for a patient’s death; the flu, for instance, is not a notifiable disease. So, if the flu complicates into a respiratory infection that kills a patient, who also has another serious illness, then the flu won’t feature as the cause of death. Extrapolating from this, we learn that if Covid-19 was not notifiable, any respiratory infection (that becomes the fatal illness) that might be thought to complicate from SARS-COV-2 would not be blamed for the death. In other words, Covid-19 would not be blamed.

However, because the list of notifiable diseases (some of which Lee quotes so that we see that they are either rare or brutal [anthrax, brucellosis, plague and rabies]) now (incongruously) contains Covid-19, it “means every positive test for Covid-19 must be notified, in a way that it just would not be for flu or most other infections”. In other words respiratory infections from flu that become the fatal illness do not get blamed for death, but those from Covid-19 do.

In his piece, Lee also gets into the ramifications of the unreliable PCR test. This test cannot detect SARS-COV-2 in sufficient abundance to demonstrate an infection, and thus that there is an illness by it. Lee says:

There is a big difference between Covid-19 causing death, and Covid-19 being found in someone who died of other causes.

Now, if the reader is not aware of this, let him now be introduced to what the US Centers for Disease Control says about the PCR test that has been used worldwide to detect SARS-COV-2 (via Jon Rappoport):

Positive [test] results are indicative of active infection with 2019-nCoV but do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite cause of disease.

What this is saying is that if SARS-COV-2 is detected, then it might not be the cause of the infection, and in fact, infection may be accounted for by another virus.

So, this potentially means that in the UK, because of the system of reporting, respiratory illness that becomes the cause of death is not necessarily Covid-19 (or an infection by SARS-COV-2), but is instead another viral infection. Or, in other words, Covid-19 is a misrepresentation of a fatal respiratory illness that has complicated from a virus or another coronavirus. Whereas before it would have been non-notifiable, now it is blamed on Covid-19.

Moreover, extrapolating from what John Lee writes, “bronchopneumonia, pneumonia, old age or a similar designation”, which is how the vast majority of respiratory deaths in the UK are recorded,  could involve complications of flu but instead be designated as Covid-19. There is more. Lee writes that, previously, “if the patient has, say, cancer, motor neurone disease or another serious disease, this will be recorded as the cause of death, even if the final illness was a respiratory infection.” From this we can extrapolate that the respiratory infection (that was concurrent with the other serious disease), that usually wouldn’t have featured as official cause, can now be promoted to it because of how the illness can be called Covid-19.

With this in mind, we should note that UK Government is using three days where there have been more than a hundred deaths (each day) attributed to Covid-19 to ramp up the perception in the public of there being yet a Herculean task to perform, and perhaps there being the necessity of a national sacrifice as if Britain was at war. This is coming at the same time that a lot of suspicion is being expressed, even by corporate-media figures, that the Covid-19 pandemic is a matter of shifting numbers in a table from one column to another. There is an idea forming (and solidifying into a good deal of certainty) that we won’t see a great number of excess deaths: or deaths that would not have happened anyway.

However, the UK Government would never have planned to profit from Covid-19 on hindsight where it could be seen to be irrelevant, but only in the here and now while it appeared to be a threat. The threat is about the numbers that corporate-media can present to the public on a daily basis – and this can be done for as long as the UK Government likes while people are dying of flu related final illness as they normally would. So, just bear this in mind as the daily death tolls are announced. And bear in mind that the UK Government can only double down because it is so abjectly criminal, so expect for the larger sort of daily death tolls to be announced as long as the UK Government wants to exploit them – or indeed, is able to. There is a distinct whiff of desperation about UK Government these days, and in its own Covid-19 adventurism, it looks to be capable of crossing a line from which it cannot return. It can’t maintain its guise of being decent in doing what it needs to do to survive, but it has no option but to do it.

When at last the episode is over, and the minimal amount of excess death can be used as a valuable tool to teach the truth, the citizenry of Britain will not see the UK Government, and its many institutions, in the same way ever again, and then it will be the beginning of its end.

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.
Displaying 1 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. Kyle G says:

    Great article as always. I have pointed out to friends that death tolls are a diagnostic sleight of hand, and they have countered by switching subject and saying, “It’s not all about deaths, what about the overburdening of the NHS?”. To which the reply is that this overburdening is a fake. There are lots of (inconclusive) videos showing footage of empty hospitals, but more reliable evidence come from Zyntrax on Twitter, who shows what seems to be solid evidence of crisis actor involvement (Colleen Smith MD) in the “hospitals are overflowing” narrative:
    Don’t know why this is not getting more coverage, so I am trying to spread it round.