MORE ON THE VIRUS ORIGINS: #2

FOR OUR PREVIOUS POST ON THE ORIGINS OF THE VIRUS SEE : https://www.righttospeakout.com/2020/03/the-origin-of-coronavirus.html

FOR OUR NEXT POST ON THE ORIGINS [#3] OF THE VIRUS SEE
https://www.righttospeakout.com/2020/04/c-19-origins-3.html 

======================================================================Coronavirus prepared at the bio-weapons laboratory in the US

The SARS-CoV-2 virus may have originated at the Fort Detrick lab, escaped into the wild due to lax safety precautions and infected military personnel at the base.

 PoliticsA- A A+
US expert Dennis Etler shared his views with Eurasia Diary regarding the spread of Coronavirus-COVID-19 in the world as well as the role of the United States in the origination of this terrible disease.  
"Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson has raised the question as to whether the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) actually originated in the US, not China. His suggestion has raised hackles in the US media and government. Zhao, however, has not accused Washington of launching a bio-weapon attack against China, he has just raised some pertinent questions that need to be answered.
Using a contagious virus as a bio-weapon makes no strategic sense. It would and obviously did backfire if the intent was to derail China's economy. In the long-run it will do the exact opposite, it will ruin the Western economies and strengthen China's economy. The modelers in the "deep state” would surely understand this. The logic of launching a viral attack creating a pandemic thus doesn't make much strategic sense.
But there is countervailing evidence that the virus itself had its origins outside of China;
1) In August 2019 the bio-weapons lab at Fort Detrick was shut down because of safety concerns. One of the special agents being researched there was the SARS-CoV coronavirus. It seems that waste water from the plant was contaminated. So, there is a potential source for a SARS-CoV coronavirus (the COVID-19 virus is SARS-CoV-2) that may have escaped into the wild and infected military personnel.
2) Soon thereafter, in October 2019, US military personnel participated in the International Military Games held in Wuhan. It is feasible that some of the roughly 300 US military participating in the games may have been infected with the virus.
3) Genetic evidence shows that the ancestral form of the virus is not found in China but has been found in the USA and Europe.
4) Reports indicate that US military stationed in Afghanistan have had COVID-19-like symptoms but have not been tested for it, suggeting that early carriers of the virus may have mistaken it for the flu since young, healthy military personnel would most likely have very mild or asymptomatic cases of COVID-19 that went unrecognized. This would be particularly true before the disease spread into Wuhan and infected more vulnerable people who got severe symptoms.
5) The US has been very secretive about the outbreak and held classified White House meetings that medical specialists did not attend, because they lacked security clearances, suggesting the intelligence service attendees knew more than they have let on about the virus..
6) On Nov. 18, 2019 a conference on preparations for a coronavirus pandemic (EVENT 201) was held in New York attended by private and public figures. Nonetheless, Washington has feigned total ignorance of the potential for any impending pandemic.
There are other unsubstantiated claims that have circulated on-line, but that doesn't take away from the evidence discussed above.
The conclusion seems to be that the SARS-CoV-2 virus may have originated at the Fort Detrick lab, escaped into the wild due to lax safety precautions and infected military personnel at the base. The virus then spread within the military, mutated into a number of haplotypes and was introduced to Wuhan during the International Military Games,
No conspiracy, but typical lax security and poor procedures by the US military that led to the virus being spread in Wuhan, leading to the local epidemic and the subsequent global pandemic.
The above evidence should not be dismissed out of hand, as it should be read and investigated by a neutral international team of forensic experts."
Картинки по запросу
Dennis Etler is an expert on Chinese Studies. Mr Etler holds a doctorate in anthropology from the University of California, Berkley. He conducted archaeological and anthropological research in China throughout the 1980s and 1990s and taught at the college and university level for over 35 years.

SOURCE: https://ednews.net/en/news/politics/421822-coronavirus-prepared-at-the-bio-weapons-laboratory-in-the-us#.Xn--HgaGLZ5.facebook=============================================================

Apart from Mr. Etler's theory, another investigative reporter and vlogger, George Webb, makes similar claims and has released a series of his "evidence" in successive videos. Perhaps the most important of these has been taken down by YouTube. He has, as one would expect when implicating the U.S. itself, come in for some criticism. He explains the situation in the video below and readers can search for other videos in his series to follow the matter fully. [Or one can subscribe to get his releases].




MORE ON THE VIRUS ORIGINS: #2

FOR OUR PREVIOUS POST ON THE ORIGINS OF THE VIRUS SEE : https://www.righttospeakout.com/2020/03/the-origin-of-coronavirus.html

FOR OUR NEXT POST ON THE ORIGINS [#3] OF THE VIRUS SEE
https://www.righttospeakout.com/2020/04/c-19-origins-3.html 

======================================================================Coronavirus prepared at the bio-weapons laboratory in the US

The SARS-CoV-2 virus may have originated at the Fort Detrick lab, escaped into the wild due to lax safety precautions and infected military personnel at the base.

 PoliticsA- A A+
US expert Dennis Etler shared his views with Eurasia Diary regarding the spread of Coronavirus-COVID-19 in the world as well as the role of the United States in the origination of this terrible disease.  
"Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson has raised the question as to whether the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) actually originated in the US, not China. His suggestion has raised hackles in the US media and government. Zhao, however, has not accused Washington of launching a bio-weapon attack against China, he has just raised some pertinent questions that need to be answered.
Using a contagious virus as a bio-weapon makes no strategic sense. It would and obviously did backfire if the intent was to derail China's economy. In the long-run it will do the exact opposite, it will ruin the Western economies and strengthen China's economy. The modelers in the "deep state” would surely understand this. The logic of launching a viral attack creating a pandemic thus doesn't make much strategic sense.
But there is countervailing evidence that the virus itself had its origins outside of China;
1) In August 2019 the bio-weapons lab at Fort Detrick was shut down because of safety concerns. One of the special agents being researched there was the SARS-CoV coronavirus. It seems that waste water from the plant was contaminated. So, there is a potential source for a SARS-CoV coronavirus (the COVID-19 virus is SARS-CoV-2) that may have escaped into the wild and infected military personnel.
2) Soon thereafter, in October 2019, US military personnel participated in the International Military Games held in Wuhan. It is feasible that some of the roughly 300 US military participating in the games may have been infected with the virus.
3) Genetic evidence shows that the ancestral form of the virus is not found in China but has been found in the USA and Europe.
4) Reports indicate that US military stationed in Afghanistan have had COVID-19-like symptoms but have not been tested for it, suggeting that early carriers of the virus may have mistaken it for the flu since young, healthy military personnel would most likely have very mild or asymptomatic cases of COVID-19 that went unrecognized. This would be particularly true before the disease spread into Wuhan and infected more vulnerable people who got severe symptoms.
5) The US has been very secretive about the outbreak and held classified White House meetings that medical specialists did not attend, because they lacked security clearances, suggesting the intelligence service attendees knew more than they have let on about the virus..
6) On Nov. 18, 2019 a conference on preparations for a coronavirus pandemic (EVENT 201) was held in New York attended by private and public figures. Nonetheless, Washington has feigned total ignorance of the potential for any impending pandemic.
There are other unsubstantiated claims that have circulated on-line, but that doesn't take away from the evidence discussed above.
The conclusion seems to be that the SARS-CoV-2 virus may have originated at the Fort Detrick lab, escaped into the wild due to lax safety precautions and infected military personnel at the base. The virus then spread within the military, mutated into a number of haplotypes and was introduced to Wuhan during the International Military Games,
No conspiracy, but typical lax security and poor procedures by the US military that led to the virus being spread in Wuhan, leading to the local epidemic and the subsequent global pandemic.
The above evidence should not be dismissed out of hand, as it should be read and investigated by a neutral international team of forensic experts."
Картинки по запросу
Dennis Etler is an expert on Chinese Studies. Mr Etler holds a doctorate in anthropology from the University of California, Berkley. He conducted archaeological and anthropological research in China throughout the 1980s and 1990s and taught at the college and university level for over 35 years.

SOURCE: https://ednews.net/en/news/politics/421822-coronavirus-prepared-at-the-bio-weapons-laboratory-in-the-us#.Xn--HgaGLZ5.facebook =============================================================

Apart from Mr. Etler's theory, another investigative reporter and vlogger, George Webb, makes similar claims and has released a series of his "evidence" in successive videos. Perhaps the most important of these has been taken down by YouTube. He has, as one would expect when implicating the U.S. itself, come in for some criticism. He explains the situation in the video below and readers can search for other videos in his series to follow the matter fully. [Or one can subscribe to get his releases].




ARE THEY FAKING DEATHS IN THE U.K.?



ARE THEY FAKING DEATHS IN THE U.K.?



HERD IMMUNITY AND A BLOW TO GLOBALISM






Countries re-tooling factories at the expense of China

Letter to the Editor

Martial law in Poland
The world is in various forms of lockdown to avoid the inevitable—a trimming of the human herd.
It’s disconcerting to reach the age and time of life where you are the one the wolves would choose to trim out of the herd, but that’s life—and death.
It’s Mother Nature’s way and I respect it—even though I heard from a reliable source that Covid-19 might have had a little help from the P-4 lab on the outskirts of Wuhan.
My beloved Warsaw is in lock-down to prevent the spread of this killer disease.  Sure, it’s over-hyped, but on the other hand—it seems to be working. Only a few deaths today and the spread is rapidly grinding to a halt.
The weak and old are dying.  The young and healthy are recovering.
Once we reach a 60% level of infection/exposure, Mother Nature kicks in with an incredible defensive mechanism yet to be understood—herd immunity.
That’s right.  Once 60% of us are exposed to this virulent form of flu, our human herd develops its own defense mechanism. How?
They haven’t a clue, but it happened with Covid 1-18, and it will happen again on #19, with or without a vaccine.
So as soldiers are closing and barricading the roads in and out of my ancient city, I’ve been thinking.
By Monday morning, only food and necessary deliveries will be allowed—which at first seems a little scary—but I’ve realised that it’s not all bad.
You see our borders are also closing for the first time since The Schengen Agreement was signed on June 14, 1985—but yesterday when guards starting dragging truckloads of combat-aged Muslims out of trucks and containers at the new border checks (15 Afghan soldiers in just one lorry)—it occurred to me that there are some upsides to all of this pain.
And it’s not just stopping the endless flood of young Muslim men invading Europe.  It’s much more—and it’s all for the better.
Borders.  Boundaries.  An end to the terrible Globalists.  A return to National Sovereignty.  Hmmm
We’re going to lose a lot from our herd to this Chinese disease—yes, that’s where it came from and they deserve the credit, so I’ll continue calling it that.
But think of it. This killer has done something that a very few of our weak-sister politricksters would on their own—it has forced them to act like leaders of nations again.
They must focus now on taking care of those they were meant to serve instead of being the head whores of open-door flop houses for the rest of the world.
So, let’s look on the bright side of Wuhan Fever
Not only are borders and boundaries springing up again—entire restructuring of our supply chains is occurring as well—and it’s all happening quite literally overnight.
“Chinese pharmaceutical companies have supplied more than 90 percent of U.S. antibiotics,” according to the New York Times—and a Chinese official hinted this week that those might be withheld as a threat to the U.S. as leverage on trade issues—and if they do, it would be good thing in my opinion.
Yes, some of us will die for lack of medicine, but it will force my home nation and everyone else’s to wake up to the dangers of allowing a Communist totalitarian gang bent on world control to hold us hostage for basic needs
The last penicillin producer in America, as example, was shuttered in 2004, largely due to unfair trade practices by China and weak U.S. leadership allowing it—but one will spring up within days now, just like two surgical mask businesses did last week.
Surgical mask and latex glove manufacturing moved to China decades ago, but they’re rolling off the assembly line in Texas by the thousands as I write—and were  up and running within weeks—thanks to private entrepreneurs and the elimination of thousands of regulations under President Trump—more of which were ditched yesterday as part of his declaration of a National Emergency.
In fact, the re-location of the supply chains just from the Hubei Province will leave China weakened for decades, and all of our nations will be strengthened in the process.
Jobs—real manufacturing jobs—are already flooding back to America, for example.  Even in the midst of this crisis, 273,000 new jobs sprung up just last month and unemployment dropped to a record low of 3.5%.
There are only two losers in all of this—the Chinese Communist Party and the Soros One Worlders.  They’re both done by the end of this pandemic.
It won’t happen overnight, but it will happen.  The world has seen the dangers of totalitarianism and the Chinese people will demand a change—in order to survive now that China’s weakness has been exposed (they’re $40 trillion in debt and entering a steep recession).
The other form of totalitarianism—Globalism—the one that brought on this pandemic—will be the other loser.
And I look forward to writing both of their obituaries.
Totalitarianism and globalism
Here they lie in this twin grave
Because like humans they could not behave.
One stole our wealth and one stole our soul,
Which is why they ended up in this damn hole.
May they never rest in peace
Howell Woltz
The International Centre for Justice
Warsaw, Poland

HERD IMMUNITY AND A BLOW TO GLOBALISM






Countries re-tooling factories at the expense of China

Letter to the Editor

Martial law in Poland
The world is in various forms of lockdown to avoid the inevitable—a trimming of the human herd.
It’s disconcerting to reach the age and time of life where you are the one the wolves would choose to trim out of the herd, but that’s life—and death.
It’s Mother Nature’s way and I respect it—even though I heard from a reliable source that Covid-19 might have had a little help from the P-4 lab on the outskirts of Wuhan.
My beloved Warsaw is in lock-down to prevent the spread of this killer disease.  Sure, it’s over-hyped, but on the other hand—it seems to be working. Only a few deaths today and the spread is rapidly grinding to a halt.
The weak and old are dying.  The young and healthy are recovering.
Once we reach a 60% level of infection/exposure, Mother Nature kicks in with an incredible defensive mechanism yet to be understood—herd immunity.
That’s right.  Once 60% of us are exposed to this virulent form of flu, our human herd develops its own defense mechanism. How?
They haven’t a clue, but it happened with Covid 1-18, and it will happen again on #19, with or without a vaccine.
So as soldiers are closing and barricading the roads in and out of my ancient city, I’ve been thinking.
By Monday morning, only food and necessary deliveries will be allowed—which at first seems a little scary—but I’ve realised that it’s not all bad.
You see our borders are also closing for the first time since The Schengen Agreement was signed on June 14, 1985—but yesterday when guards starting dragging truckloads of combat-aged Muslims out of trucks and containers at the new border checks (15 Afghan soldiers in just one lorry)—it occurred to me that there are some upsides to all of this pain.
And it’s not just stopping the endless flood of young Muslim men invading Europe.  It’s much more—and it’s all for the better.
Borders.  Boundaries.  An end to the terrible Globalists.  A return to National Sovereignty.  Hmmm
We’re going to lose a lot from our herd to this Chinese disease—yes, that’s where it came from and they deserve the credit, so I’ll continue calling it that.
But think of it. This killer has done something that a very few of our weak-sister politricksters would on their own—it has forced them to act like leaders of nations again.
They must focus now on taking care of those they were meant to serve instead of being the head whores of open-door flop houses for the rest of the world.
So, let’s look on the bright side of Wuhan Fever
Not only are borders and boundaries springing up again—entire restructuring of our supply chains is occurring as well—and it’s all happening quite literally overnight.
“Chinese pharmaceutical companies have supplied more than 90 percent of U.S. antibiotics,” according to the New York Times—and a Chinese official hinted this week that those might be withheld as a threat to the U.S. as leverage on trade issues—and if they do, it would be good thing in my opinion.
Yes, some of us will die for lack of medicine, but it will force my home nation and everyone else’s to wake up to the dangers of allowing a Communist totalitarian gang bent on world control to hold us hostage for basic needs
The last penicillin producer in America, as example, was shuttered in 2004, largely due to unfair trade practices by China and weak U.S. leadership allowing it—but one will spring up within days now, just like two surgical mask businesses did last week.
Surgical mask and latex glove manufacturing moved to China decades ago, but they’re rolling off the assembly line in Texas by the thousands as I write—and were  up and running within weeks—thanks to private entrepreneurs and the elimination of thousands of regulations under President Trump—more of which were ditched yesterday as part of his declaration of a National Emergency.
In fact, the re-location of the supply chains just from the Hubei Province will leave China weakened for decades, and all of our nations will be strengthened in the process.
Jobs—real manufacturing jobs—are already flooding back to America, for example.  Even in the midst of this crisis, 273,000 new jobs sprung up just last month and unemployment dropped to a record low of 3.5%.
There are only two losers in all of this—the Chinese Communist Party and the Soros One Worlders.  They’re both done by the end of this pandemic.
It won’t happen overnight, but it will happen.  The world has seen the dangers of totalitarianism and the Chinese people will demand a change—in order to survive now that China’s weakness has been exposed (they’re $40 trillion in debt and entering a steep recession).
The other form of totalitarianism—Globalism—the one that brought on this pandemic—will be the other loser.
And I look forward to writing both of their obituaries.
Totalitarianism and globalism
Here they lie in this twin grave
Because like humans they could not behave.
One stole our wealth and one stole our soul,
Which is why they ended up in this damn hole.
May they never rest in peace
Howell Woltz
The International Centre for Justice
Warsaw, Poland

COVID-19 DEATH RATES ARE INACCURATE

Every day, now, we are seeing figures for ‘Covid deaths’. These numbers are often expressed on graphs showing an exponential rise. But care must be taken when reading (and reporting) these figures. Given the extraordinary response to the emergence of this virus, it’s vital to have a clear-eyed view of its progress and what the figures mean. The world of disease reporting has its own dynamics, ones that are worth understanding. How accurate, or comparable, are these figures comparing Covid-19 deaths in various countries?
We often see a ratio expressed: deaths, as a proportion of cases. The figure is taken as a sign of how lethal Covid-19 is, but the ratios vary wildly. In the US, 1.8 per cent (2,191 deaths in 124,686 confirmed cases), Italy 10.8 per cent, Spain 8.2 per cent, Germany 0.8 per cent, France 6.1 per cent, UK 6.0 per cent. A fifteen-fold difference in death rate for the same disease seems odd amongst such similar countries: all developed, all with good healthcare systems. All tackling the same disease.
You might think it would be easy to calculate death rates. Death is a stark and easy-to-measure end point. In my working life (I’m a retired pathology professor) I usually come across studies that express it comparably and as a ratio: the number of deaths in a given period of time in an area, divided by that area’s population. For example, 10 deaths per 1,000 population per year. So just three numbers:
  1. The population who have contracted the disease
  2. The number dying of disease
  3. The relevant time period

The trouble is that in the Covid-19 crisis each one of these numbers is unclear.
1. Why the figures for Covid-19 infections are a vast underestimate


    Say there was a disease that always caused a large purple spot to appear in the middle of your forehead after two days – it would be easy to measure. Any doctor could diagnose this, and national figures would be reliable. Now, consider a disease that causes a variable raised temperature and cough over a period of 5 to 14 days, as well as variable respiratory symptoms ranging from hardly anything to severe respiratory compromise. There will be a range of symptoms and signs in patients affected by this disease; widely overlapping with similar effects caused by many other infectious diseases. Is it Covid-19, seasonal flu, a cold – or something else? It will be impossible to tell by clinical examination.
    The only way to identify people who definitely have the disease will be by using a lab test that is both specific for the disease (detects this disease only, and not similar diseases) and sensitive for the disease (picks up a large proportion of people with this disease, whether severe or mild). Developing accurate, reliable, validated tests is difficult and takes time. At the moment, we have to take it on trust that the tests in use are measuring what we think they are.
    So far in this pandemic, test kits have mainly been reserved for hospitalised patients with significant symptoms. Few tests have been carried out in patients with mild symptoms. This means that the number of positive tests will be far lower than the number of people who have had the disease. Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, has been trying to stress this. He suggested that the real figure for the number of cases could be 10 to 20 times higher than the official figure. If he’s right, the headline death rate due to this virus (all derived from lab tests) will be 10 to 20 times lower than it appears to be from the published figures. The more the number of untested cases goes up, the lower the true death rate.
     2. Why Covid-19 deaths are a substantial over-estimate
    Next, what about the deaths? Many UK health spokespersons have been careful to repeatedly say that the numbers quoted in the UK indicate death with the virus, not death due to the virus – this matters. When giving evidence in parliament a few days ago, Prof. Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London said that he now expects fewer than 20,000 Covid-19 deaths in the UK but, importantly, two-thirds of these people would have died anyway. In other words, he suggests that the crude figure for ‘Covid deaths’ is three times higher than the number who have actually been killed by Covid-19. (Even the two-thirds figure is an estimate – it would not surprise me if the real proportion is higher.)
    This nuance is crucial ­– not just in understanding the disease, but for understanding the burden it might place on the health service in coming days. Unfortunately nuance tends to be lost in the numbers quoted from the database being used to track Covid-19: the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. It has compiled a huge database, with Covid-19 data from all over the world, updated daily – and its figures are used, world over, to track the virus. This data is not standardised and so probably not comparable, yet this important caveat is seldom expressed by the (many) graphs we see. It risks exaggerating the quality of data that we have.
    The distinction between dying ‘with’ Covid-19 and dying ‘due to’ Covid-19 is not just splitting hairs. Consider some examples: an 87-year-old woman with dementia in a nursing home; a 79-year-old man with metastatic bladder cancer; a 29-year-old man with leukaemia treated with chemotherapy; a 46-year-old woman with motor neurone disease for 2 years. All develop chest infections and die. All test positive for Covid-19. Yet all were vulnerable to death by chest infection from any infective cause (including the flu). Covid-19 might have been the final straw, but it has not caused their deaths. Consider two more cases: a 75-year-old man with mild heart failure and bronchitis; a 35-year-old woman who was previously fit and well with no known medical conditions. Both contract a chest infection and die, and both test positive for Covid-19. In the first case it is not entirely clear what weight to place on the pre-existing conditions versus the viral infection – to make this judgement would require an expert clinician to examine the case notes. The final case would reasonably be attributed to death caused by Covid-19, assuming it was true that there were no underlying conditions.
    It should be noted that there is no international standard method for attributing or recording causes of death. Also, normally, most respiratory deaths never have a specific infective cause recorded, whereas at the moment one can expect all positive Covid-19 results associated with a death to be recorded. Again, this is not splitting hairs. Imagine a population where more and more of us have already had Covid-19, and where every ill and dying patient is tested for the virus. The deaths apparently due to Covid-19, the Covid trajectory, will approach the overall death rate. It would appear that all deaths were caused by Covid-19 – would this be true? No. The severity of the epidemic would be indicated by how many extra deaths (above normal) there were overall.
    3. Covid-19 and a time period

      Finally, what about the time period? In a fast-moving scenario such as the Covid-19 crisis, the daily figures present just a snapshot. If people take quite a long time to die of a disease, it will take a while to judge the real death rate and initial figures will be an underestimate. But if people die quite quickly of the disease, the figures will be nearer the true rate. It is probable that there is a slight lag – those dying today might have been seriously ill for some days. But as time goes by this will become less important as a steady state is reached.

      Let me finish with a couple of examples. Colleagues in Germany feel sure that their numbers are nearer the truth than most, because they had plenty of testing capacity ready when the pandemic struck. Currently the death rate is 0.8 per cent in Germany. If we assume that about one third of the recorded deaths are due to Covid-19 and that they have managed to test a third of all cases in the country who actually have the disease (a generous assumption), then the death rate for Covid-19 would be 0.08 per cent. That might go up slightly, as a result of death lag. If we assume at present that this effect might be 25 per cent (which seems generous), that would give an overall, and probably upper limit, of death rate of 0.1 per cent, which is similar to seasonal flu.
      Let’s look at the UK numbers. As of 9 a.m. on Saturday there were 1,019 deaths and 17,089 confirmed cases – a death rate of 6.0 per cent. If one third of the deaths are caused by Covid-19 and the number of cases is underestimated by a factor of say 15, the death rate would be 0.13 per cent and the number of deaths due to Covid-19 would be 340. This number should be placed in perspective with the number of deaths we would normally expect in the first 28 days of March – roughly 46,000.
      The number of recorded deaths will increase in the coming days, but so will the population affected by the disease – in all probability much faster than the increase in deaths. Because we are looking so closely at the presence of Covid-19 in those who die – as I look at in more detail in my article in the current issue of The Spectator – the fraction of those who die with Covid-19 (but not of it) in a population where the incidence is increasing, is likely to increase even more. So the measured increase in numbers of deaths is not necessarily a cause for alarm, unless it demonstrates excess deaths – 340 deaths out of 46,000 shows we are not near this at present. We have prepared for the worst, but it has not yet happened. The widespread testing of NHS staff recently announced may help provide a clearer indication of how far the disease has already spread within the population.
      The UK and other governments have no control over how their data is reported, but they can minimise the potential for misinterpretation by making absolutely clear what its figures are, and what they are not. After this episode is over, there is a clear need for an internationally coordinated update of how deaths are attributed and recorded, to enable us to better understand what is happening more clearly, when we need to.
      John Lee is a recently retired professor of pathology and a former NHS consultant pathologist.