Thread by @James_Townsend9

🧵SCIENTISTS ADMIT MASS COVID-19 TESTING ARGUMENT RESTS ON A “HYPOTHESIS”🦠💥

With their influence waning, @IndependentSage has rebuked Gov plans to end “free” COVID-19 tests— urging the “immediate” publication of scientific evidence.

So, what is their own evidence? Read more👇🏻

So, for background, who exactly are Independent Sage?

They say they are a “group of scientists who are working together to provide independent scientific advice to the UK government and public on how to minimise deaths and support Britain’s recovery from the COVID-19 crisis.”

Prominent members include:
•Prof Susan Michie
•Prof Christina Pagel
•Prof Gabriel Scally
•Dr Zubaida Haque
•Dr Kit Yates

All of whom have been plastered over our television screens, airwaves, & newspapers since the pandemic began.

It’s not the first time I’ve featured them

Last summer, I reported how they demanded a public apology from Richard Madeley for daring to ask whether Prof Susan Michie’s communist views and apparent support of China, impaired her ability to offer impartial advice on the viability of lockdowns and other draconian measures👇🏻

Madeley, for his part, was branded a misogynist for asking questions of Michie’s political leanings.

But, as you can see here, Independent Sage say one of their founding principles is “openness and transparency” which “leads to better understanding and better decision making.”

That is great news, right? Because everyone knows how important it is for scientists to show openness & transparency for the public to trust them.

So, when I saw the below, I assumed IndySAGE would have some robust science to back up their stance on “free”, mass Covid testing.

After all, it is a group of scientists calling for the government to publish their scientific evidence.

And, after all, we’ve been mass testing our population for the past two years. Had it been scientifically beneficial, the evidence would surely be crystal clear by now?

Before we examine their evidence, a point of semantics.

IndySAGE bemoan the ending of “free” Covid-19 tests. In reality, there is no such thing as a free test.

The PCR and LFT tests have all been paid for through taxes. To be specific, the 2-year £37bn NHS Test & Trace budget.

So, when they talk about “free tests”, please know that there is actually no such concept.

Your rising household bills, and rising inflation, is partly down to our collective response to this “pandemic” which includes the rollout of mass testing of (largely healthy) people.

Back to the key issue:

IndySAGE has demanded to know the gov’s science on its testing decision, so what is *their* own science to justify it?

Statement: “Alongside NHS leaders, we condemn the reported decision to stop free COVID-19 tests and payments to support self-isolation.”

“Widespread availability of these tests alongside existing PCR tests might have contributed to reducing peak infections both in last summer & this winter.”

Hang on, “MIGHT HAVE” contributed?

That doesn’t sound very scientific, does it? Especially after 2 years of mass testing.

However, that sentence is hyperlinked to another document, suggesting it leads to evidence that mass testing led to reduced Covid-19 infections.

So, I clicked the link.

It links to SAGE minutes of 28 Jan 22, attended by 65 officials inc CMO Chris Whitty & GCSA Patrick Vallance.

I scoured the minutes, and their Situation Update, for said evidence.

Here is the only remotely relevant information that I found.

“One hypothesis is that community testing & communication of risk within local networks sufficiently interrupted transmission to restrict growth.”

So, hang on again, this isn’t robust science or unequivocal evidence. It’s a — in their own words — “hypothesis”.

Which means “supposition made on the basis of limited evidence & as a starting point for further investigation.”

Is a loose theory really the basis for their views?

The report continues: “Changes to testing behaviour could have a larger impact on epidemic trajectories than other non-pharmaceutical interventions, but this remains uncertain & further evidence on testing behaviours is required.”

There are those magic words again: “COULD HAVE”.

Surely if IndySAGE believed in “openness and transparency” and wanted to put the government under more pressure over their potential decision to halt mass testing, they would provide better evidence than a wooly, vague theory?💥

In reality: seasonality, natural immunity, and..

…the milder Omicron variant are far more relevant factors in explaining falling infection rates that we have seen last summer & again this winter. Just ask Bill.

But maybe that doesn’t suit their narrative? The rest of their statement is rooted in the same ideology and dogma…

…which led to the UK Gov imposing the most draconian restrictions on our civil liberties ever seen.

It talks about “increased risk” of Omicron & subsequent variants leading to “more illness, death & burden on the NHS” which is just more scaremongering trash based on no evidence

It also predictably falls back on the “long Covid” argument (rebranded from Post-Viral Fatigue Syndrome) & the “loss of reassurance provided by lateral flow tests” which cynically refers to the same people IndySAGE has been responsible for terrifying through lies and propaganda.

Ultimately, the statement is reminiscent of an abusive partner losing grip on controlling behaviour.

They demand the urgent publication of Gov science, yet admit their argument for mass testing relies on a hypothesis💥

It should be treated with the contempt it deserves.

ENDS

As ever, thanks for reading and a share is always appreciated. You can also find this thread on my Substack — sign up today!🙏🏻
#Covid #coronavirus #testing #Sage #COVID19 #Covid_19 #misinformation #CoronavirusUpdates #Science #PCR #LFT #pandemic #COVIDIOT #Omicron