English: Shall we now turn to the other statistic that is guiding the Welsh Government's interventions, that is deaths from COVID-19 infection? Here, I feel it's imperative to make the distinction between those said to have died as a direct consequence of COVID-19 and those who are said to have died with COVID-19. Let me now quote from the medical advice given to doctors with regard to recording deaths where COVID is present or indeed simply thought to be present: 'Medical practitioners are required to certify causes of death "to the best of their knowledge and belief." Without diagnostic proof, if appropriate and to avoid delay, medical practitioners can circle "2" ' in the medical certificate of cause of death, 'the MCCD ("information from post-mortem may be available later") or tick Box B on the reverse of the MCCD for ante-mortem investigations. For example, if before death the patient had symptoms typical of COVID-19 infection, but the test result has not been received, it would be satisfactory to give "Covid-19" as the cause of death'. This means, of course, that deaths can be recorded as COVID-related even if a test for COVID has not been carried out. Every day we hear of deaths from COVID being given out as a bare statistic - no mention of how old the deceased was or whether they had long-term underlying illnesses, such as cancer, vascular problems, diabetes, or one of the many other life-threatening illnesses from which people die daily. Medical codes state that it's no longer acceptable to pronounce death from natural causes, or, in short, old age. Statistics, however, show that the vast majority of deaths occur in people over 80 years of age and very few, or even none, to people under 50. So, what are these catastrophic consequences brought about by nationwide lockdowns? Well, they are many and varied, but each in its way life-changing for the many hundreds of thousands, indeed even millions, negatively affected by these interventions. First there is, of course, the disastrous economic impact they have on society as a whole and on individuals in general. Many thousands of businesses have collapsed or are on the brink of collapse with, of course, the attendant loss of countless thousands of jobs. There's a huge consequential impact on those made redundant where finances are cut dramatically, often resulting in large increases in personal debt and general financial hardship. There is a direct correlation between such loss of income and self-esteem often leading to mental health problems and even suicide. Indeed, statistical evidence shows a huge rise in suicides since the onset of lockdowns. Let us now turn to the subject of deaths during the coronavirus crisis. Of course, protecting people's lives has given us the prime reason for Governments' interventions with regard to COVID, but we now know that, as a direct result of COVID restrictions, there are a very large number of deaths occurring because people have not or cannot present to clinicians. There has been a huge rise in deaths from cancer, heart disease, stroke and diabetes, and a whole myriad of diseases as a result of the usual clinical interventions not being carried out. These deaths are witnessed by the steep rise in deaths at home as opposed to hospital. Many believe there's a huge reservoir building of people not seeking timely medical help for these killer diseases, the impact of which will not present for some time to come. We are at present in a 14-day lockdown, and after that, what next? Anyone can predict that, as soon as the lockdown ends, COVID infections will rise again. So, do we go into another lockdown phase, followed by another and another and another ad infinitum? Or are we simply waiting for a vaccine to end this terrible blight on the nation's economy and well-being? We all know that whoever produces such a vaccine will make billions of pounds on a recurring basis, as the inoculations will have to be repeated at suitable intervals, because this virus is said to mutate. Now, incidentally, it is not thought to mutate at the same rate as the common flu virus. I shall conclude by asking this question: can we really justify tearing the economy apart, with all the consequences outlined above, to save such few lives, especially if we consider that this could be done with much more targeted interventions? It is impossible to overestimate the catastrophic consequences of nationwide lockdowns, especially for the poor in our society. Let me quote Dr David Nabarro of the World Health Organization: 'Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never, ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer.' And poor people actually are likely to die 10 years ahead of those who are over 80 and those who are dying from COVID today. So, to finish, there comes a time when the cure has become worse than the illness, and I and many others believe that that time is now.
Welsh: A gawn ni droi yn awr at yr ystadegyn arall sy'n arwain ymyriadau Llywodraeth Cymru, sef marwolaethau o haint COVID-19? Yma, rwy'n teimlo ei bod yn hanfodol gwahaniaethu rhwng y rhai y dywedir eu bod wedi marw o ganlyniad uniongyrchol i COVID-19 a'r rhai y dywedir eu bod wedi marw gyda COVID-19. Gadewch imi ddyfynnu'n awr o'r cyngor meddygol a roddir i feddygon ynglŷn â chofnodi marwolaethau lle mae COVID yn bresennol neu'n wir, lle credir ei fod yn bresennol: Gofynnir i ymarferwyr meddygol ardystio achosion marwolaeth 'hyd eithaf eu gwybodaeth a'u cred'. Heb brawf diagnostig, os yw'n briodol ac er mwyn osgoi oedi, gall ymarferwyr meddygol gylchu '2' ar y dystysgrif feddygol o achos marwolaeth, ('gall gwybodaeth o bost-mortem fod ar gael yn nes ymlaen') neu dicio Blwch B ar gefn y dystysgrif ar gyfer archwiliadau cyn marwolaeth. Er enghraifft, pe bai gan y claf symptomau cyn marwolaeth sy'n nodweddiadol o haint COVID-19, ond nad yw canlyniad y prawf wedi dod i law, byddai'n foddhaol rhoi 'Covid-19' fel achos marwolaeth. Mae hyn yn golygu, wrth gwrs, y gellir cofnodi marwolaethau fel rhai sy'n gysylltiedig â COVID hyd yn oed os na wnaed prawf ar gyfer COVID. Bob dydd clywn am farwolaethau o COVID yn cael eu rhoi fel ystadegyn moel - dim sôn am ba mor hen oedd yr ymadawedig na ph'un a oedd ganddynt afiechydon isorweddol hirdymor, megis canser, problemau fasgwlaidd, diabetes, neu un o'r nifer o afiechydon eraill sy'n bygwth bywyd y mae pobl yn marw ohonynt bob dydd. Dywed codau meddygol nad yw'n dderbyniol mwyach i ddatgan bod marwolaeth wedi digwydd o achosion naturiol, neu henaint mewn geiriau eraill. Fodd bynnag, mae ystadegau'n dangos bod y mwyafrif helaeth o farwolaethau'n digwydd mewn pobl dros 80 oed ac ychydig iawn, os o gwbl, mewn pobl o dan 50 oed. Felly, beth yw'r canlyniadau trychinebus a achosir gan y cyfyngiadau symud cenedlaethol? Wel, maent yn niferus ac yn amrywiol, ond mae pob un yn ei ffordd yn newid bywydau'r cannoedd o filoedd, miliynau yn wir, yr effeithir arnynt yn negyddol gan yr ymyriadau hyn. Yn gyntaf, wrth gwrs, ceir eu heffaith economaidd drychinebus ar gymdeithas yn ei chyfanrwydd ac ar unigolion yn gyffredinol. Mae miloedd lawer o fusnesau wedi chwalu neu ar fin chwalu, gan arwain at golli miloedd di-ben-draw o swyddi. Mae effaith ganlyniadol enfawr ar y rhai a ddiswyddwyd lle caiff arian ei dorri'n llym, gan arwain yn aml at gynnydd mawr mewn dyledion personol a chaledi ariannol cyffredinol. Mae cydberthynas uniongyrchol rhwng colli incwm a hunan-barch yn y ffordd hon sy'n aml yn arwain at broblemau iechyd meddwl a hyd yn oed at hunanladdiad. Yn wir, mae tystiolaeth ystadegol yn dangos cynnydd enfawr yn nifer yr hunanladdiadau ers dechrau'r cyfyngiadau symud. Gadewch inni droi yn awr at farwolaethau yn ystod yr argyfwng coronafeirws. Wrth gwrs, diogelu bywydau pobl sydd wedi rhoi'r prif reswm inni dros ymyriadau Llywodraethau mewn perthynas â COVID, ond gwyddom bellach, o ganlyniad uniongyrchol i gyfyngiadau COVID, fod nifer fawr iawn o farwolaethau'n digwydd oherwydd nad yw pobl yn troi at glinigwyr neu am na allant wneud hynny. Bu cynnydd enfawr yn nifer y marwolaethau o ganser, clefyd y galon, strôc a diabetes, a llu o glefydau o ganlyniad i'r ffaith nad yw ymyriadau clinigol arferol yn digwydd. Arwydd o'r marwolaethau hyn yw'r cynnydd sydyn yn nifer y marwolaethau sy'n digwydd yn y cartref yn hytrach na'r ysbyty. Mae llawer o'r farn fod yna gronfa gynyddol o bobl nad ydynt yn cael cymorth meddygol amserol ar gyfer y clefydau hyn sy'n lladd, ac ni fydd effaith hynny i'w deimlo am beth amser i ddod. Ar hyn o bryd, rydym dan gyfyngiadau symud am 14 diwrnod, ac ar ôl hynny, beth nesaf? Gall unrhyw un ragweld, cyn gynted ag y daw'r cyfyngiadau i ben, y bydd nifer yr achosion o COVID yn cynyddu eto. Felly, a ydym yn wynebu cyfnod arall o gyfyngiadau, wedi'i ddilyn gan un arall ac un arall yn ddiddiwedd? Neu a ydym yn aros am frechlyn i roi diwedd ar y malltod ofnadwy hwn ar economi a lles y wlad? Gwyddom i gyd y bydd pwy bynnag sy'n cynhyrchu brechlyn o'r fath yn gwneud biliynau o bunnoedd am amser hir i ddod, gan y bydd yn rhaid ailadrodd y brechiadau ar gyfnodau addas, oherwydd dywedir bod y feirws hwn yn mwtadu. Nawr, fel mae'n digwydd, ni chredir ei fod yn mwtadu ar yr un gyfradd â'r feirws ffliw cyffredin. Rwyf am gloi drwy ofyn y cwestiwn hwn: a allwn gyfiawnhau chwalu'r economi, gyda'r holl ganlyniadau a amlinellir uchod, i achub cyn lleied o fywydau, yn enwedig os ystyriwn y gellid gwneud hyn gydag ymyriadau wedi'u targedu'n llawer gwell? Mae'n amhosibl gorbwysleisio canlyniadau trychinebus cyfyngiadau cenedlaethol, yn enwedig i'r tlawd yn ein cymdeithas. Gadewch i mi ddyfynnu Dr David Nabarro o Sefydliad Iechyd y Byd: Mae i gyfyngiadau symud un canlyniad na ddylech byth ei fychanu, sef eu bod yn gwneud pobl dlawd gymaint yn dlotach. Ac mae pobl dlawd yn debygol o farw 10 mlynedd yn gynt na'r rhai sydd dros 80 oed a'r rhai sy'n marw o COVID heddiw. Felly, i orffen, daw adeg pan fo'r gwellhad yn dod yn waeth na'r salwch, ac rwyf fi a llawer o rai eraill yn credu ein bod wedi cyrraedd yr amser hwnnw.