Irish interview with Johan Giesecke. Interviewer @boucherhayes seems to have a solid grasp of epidemiological confounders, and Giesecke denies giving advice (paid?) and admits he spoke without any research into local conditions.
rte.ie/radio/utils/sh…
Gisecke's testimony, where he clearly *is* giving advice
irishtimes.com/news/health/sw…
1. wait a year to compare countries
2. soft lockdown like Sweden can be effective
3. don't build a strategy based on a vaccine
4. you should allow controlled spread in groups under 70
>
5. keep your schools open
6. poor & marginalised get hurt most by disease
7. covid isn't that mysterious.
My comments -
1. rubbish, you can always learn from each other. He's attempting to "teach" Ireland here
2. I completely agree.
3. disagree. There's 11 vaccines in stage 3 trials. Historically 5 of 6 vaccines pass through this to approval. >
If for whatever reason they're not effective enough, then you can adjust strategies.
4. He's not worried about "long covid", need to compare to other post-viral symptoms. Also doesn't appear concerned about the significant death toll among younger groups
5. He cites the Swedish/Finnish school "study" which FHM has already backtracked and just called a "situation report"
6. Agreed - but most of the arguments about stricter interventions seem to me to be arguments *for* better government support, not for weaker interventions
7. Yet there remain mysteries, like #longhaulers, reinfection rates, and other potential health impacts
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.