Comments by "Graeme Peters" (@graemepeters5717) on "Double Down News" channel.

  1. Who would you have instead? Kier Starmer and Diane Abbott!
    1
  2. You asked "So how do you explain the last two days?" I answered 'the weekend'. The 7-day average by date reported is 1,060. The 7-day average by date of death is 792. Though not yet complete - there may be a handful of deaths to add which have not yet been recorded, that's all. So my information came from the monthly reports of the Office of National Statistics and yours came from the BBC - nuff said! Keri Mullis is on record saying that the PCR test cannot identify the presence of coronavirus ANY CORONAVIRUS - just the presence of genetic material, which gives the release of the fluorescent particles which they measure. Never done Facebook or Twitter in my life. They've never isolated SARS-Cov2. Yet they claim so many are 'asymptomatic'. How many people get flu without symptoms? I've got an interest testimony from a test lab manager (Phd virology & immunology) in S. California, who re-tested 1500 positive Covid PCR tests using Koch's and SEM. They found mainly flu A and some flu B but zero Covid. Sent some samples to Stanford, Cornell and University of California labs and got identical results. CDC could not provide ANY Covid samples. They are now suing the CDC for fraud.
    1
  3. After 7 mins of listening to this fool talking out of his arse I can take no more! Shame he didn't look at the statistics before opening his mouth. Death numbers last 8 days: 407, 830, 1041, 1162, 1325, 1035, 563, 529. The artificially 4 higher numbers were because of the delays caused by New Year. They've now returned to normal so no 100,000 by the end of the month. The number of 'cases', has increased because the number of PCR tests by private labs has increased by 10 times what it was! There are 32,000 Covid patients in UK hospitals, 3,000 of which are 'serious'. If you fill the beds with 29,000 'mild' cases of flu, what do you expect? Why not 'follow the science', as advocated by the WHO, FDA, CDC, Fauci, and viral experts across the World, and reduce the number of magnification cycles on the PCR test from a meaningless 40+, to 30 or 35? At 35 cycles, 50% of the results would not qualify as positive and the number would be reduced by a further 70% at 30 cycles.
    1
  4.  @teddansonLA  It is interesting that the two figures you omit (563 &529) actually answer your question - le weekend! If you look at the 'date of death' instead of 'date reported' figures, you avoid the sensationalist peaks, used to misinform and manipulate public opinion. Those are 831, 832, 847, 776, 759, 780, 730. Though not yet complete, they show a 7-day average of 793. Just taking the known false positives into account, would cause an increase. The number of deaths for people under 60, with no health conditions is still below 400 since this began. It includes those who died of pneumonia, heart attack, falling down stairs, hit by a bus - within 28 days of a positive test. Surely, even you don't consider those should be included in the 'infection mortality rate' Between 500,000 and 600,000 people die in the UK each year. We are still BELOW the 5 yr average - what does that tell you? Even the inventor of the PCR test, Keri Mullis, said the PCR test cannot be used to identify cases of coronavirus. It will only show the presence of genetic material which indicates the possible presence of coronavirus. Both the UK and Canadian Govts have admitted they have never isolated SARS-Cov2, so do not have a DNA profile for it. Yes the number of positive PCR tests IS related to the number of hospital admissions. If you tell 50,000 people a day they have Covid, they are going to turn up at the hospital, the first time they cough or sneeze. It's the tail wagging the dog!
    1
  5. My reply was to your thread. If it came up as a new thread, that is beyond my control. I said the 4 figures over 1,000 were as a result of New Year. You then asked about the 2, which were after the two low figures, which had been reported at the weekend. Both weekends and bank holidays cause delays in reporting, and hence peaks afterwards. Nonetheless, the daily death figure has never been over 1,000, which was why I advocated using the date of death rather than date reported figures. I have not read the ONS monthly reports recently - they are not that interesting. I remember that last summer, each one stated the deaths total was below the 5-year average, then the deaths dropped down to single or double figures until Sept. So any catch-up has been since then - which wouldn't match the overall total, would it? "The four research papers that do describe the genomic extracts of the Covid 19 virus never were successful in isolating and purifying the samples. All the four papers written on Covid 19 only describe small bits of RNA which were only 37 to 40 base pairs long which is NOT A VIRUS. A viral genome is typically 30,000 to 40,000 base pairs. With as bad as Covid is supposed to be all over the place, how come no one in any lab world wide has ever isolated and purified this virus in its entirety?" "CDC has actually admitted that they do not have the virus and thus they have used something else on their tests: fda.gov/media/134922 "Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen." I thank you for calling me a moron. I shall wear your label with pride!
    1