When will the #JohnSnowMemo authors formally reject @marcbonten’s signature? He is an outspoken mitigation /‘immunity buildup’ advocate since the start of the pandemic. 1/N
In this tweet, @MarcBonten, a prominent member of the Dutch 'Outbreak Management Team', the official advisory council to the government, states he has signed the #JohnSnowMemo while also reaffirming his stance in support of #HerdImmunity:
He links to his article from May and reaffirms his position as outlined in that article. A Google Translated version of this article can be found here, for your convenience: screens.wings.dev/Groepsimmunite…

He only says that herd immunity buildup is not the *only* measure (!) 3/N
The problem is: as long as you reserve any role of significance *at all* for immunity buildup in your epidemiological strategy, assuming infections result in protective immunity which suppresses the R, it results in a radical shift in your framework of political calculations 4/N
Namely: virus circulation among young/healthy will be considered beneficial to your pandemic response strategy, actually an 'investment' in population resilience - which is exactly how the strategy of 'maximum control' (controlled spread' has been described by Jaap van Dissel 5/N
It is downright farcical that @marcbonten has the audacity to both sign the #JohnSnowMemo as well as simultenously reaffirms his support for #HerdImmunity without batting an eye. He abuses the #JohnSnowMemo to whitewash the very strategy it sets out to condemn. 6/N
I appreciate the efforts of the #JohnSnowMemo authors, but you are missing the mark in some respects:
1) it is not *really* about 'immunity'. No country which pursued #HerdImmunity bothered to study immunisation first, nor were serious efforts made to 'shield off the frail' 7/N
- and research findings indicating immunity may neither be strong, effective nor long-lasting did not result in meaningful policy changes. #HerdImmunity should be re-labeled as mitigation, 'let it rip' or 'let them die'
- Many countries who initially embraced the concept of #HerdImmunity, later said it is just a 'by-effect' not a policy goal. However, if expected immunity is considered beneficial to overall pandemic response, desire to contain the virus at low circulation levels disappears 9/N
The result is all the same: the virus is allowed to spread until ICUs fill up, half-hearted (or whole-heartedly half-asssed) containment plans that fail to deliver notwithstanding. The result is the same, but the framing isn't, the narrative is different. 10/N
Therefore, dear #JohnSnowMemo authors, it doesn't help to unequivocally condemn 'HerdImmunity'. As you can see, even the #HerdImmunity architects of the Netherlands advocating a controlled spread have no qualms about signing your manifesto. I'd like to ask you to do *more* 11/N
What we need, is international condemnation of the national pandemic response policies that boil down to #HerdImmunity. We should be able to point to international expert analysis stating that the Dutch strategy is not containment/suppression but mitigation/controlled spread 12/N
Because we have a REALLY HARD TIME even getting the pandemic response strategy even on the media agenda. The official narrative is that we are suppressing the virus, just making a couple of mistakes + blaming the public for not following the rules 13/N
However, that's not the reason we have one of the highest levels of circulation globally, will see our health infrastructure completely collapse in weeks time, and may expect tens of thousands of deaths in the coming months. It is the strategy, and has been all along. 14/N
If you need proof, ask @containmentnu / @containmentnow or @C19RedTeam for that matter, or read up on containmentnu.nl/en/home. So, what I would like to request from the international scientific community, is the following: 15/N
1) publicly give your expert analysis which country is pursuing 'herd immunity'. Everyone talks about Sweden all the time. Talk about The Netherlands, we can easily prove the Dutch strategy is herd immunity / 'let them die'
2) publicly refuse #JohnSnowMemo signatures of Dutch OMT members such as @marcbonten, @marionkoopmans, @Jankluytmans, knowing that refusing to do so allows them to whitewash the Dutch 'Herd immunity but only as a by-effect wink wink' strategy.

Thank you. 17/N
@threadreaderapp unroll pls
Addendum: @marionkoopmans states she is against #Herdimmunity, but what she does advocate are vaccines / treatments – compatible with an 'allow it to spread' strategy. It obfuscates the fact she *doesn't* advocate the alternative: suppression/containment

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Jaap Stronks

Jaap Stronks Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jaapstronks

16 Oct
This is not good enough. You are mentioning three things that will make infections less bad, which constitutes a position still fully compatible with the ‘controlled spread’ strategy
There are two options, @MarionKoopmans :
1) containment / suppression: keeping it between 2-50 infections / 100 k. Most people never get it
2) allowing it to spread until ICUs fill up. AKA ‘herd immunity’ / mitigation. This is the Dutch strategy.

Which do you endorse?
Because @MarionKoopmans, you have been an outspoken #HerdImmunity strategy advocate in the past. Your current position, stressing the importance of vaccines and treatments, presupposes continued high virus circulation.

In other words: it’s #HerdImmunity with smoke & mirrors.
Read 4 tweets
16 Oct
Komt geen derde golf. Ze hebben geleerd van de 1e: nu blijven de scholen open zodat er altijd een verborgen circulatie is die zorgt voor constante doorgifte naar cohort 18-40. Uitsurfen, versoepelen zodra ergste druk vd zorg af is, tot aan ‘groepsimmuniteit’
En dat betekent: R=1 zonder bijzondere maatregelen, met een constante stroom zieken. Er zijn geen bijzondere maatregelen om kwetsbare groepen af te schermen, dus gecontroleerd uitrazen obv het ‘just let them die’-principe
Gevolg: een bevolking met 50k-100k minder mensen en een heleboel langdurig zieken. Maar beter dat dan een precedent-scheppende public health-infrastructuur, aldus het late-stage-kapitalistische denken dat instinctief het beschermende containment als idee afwijst
Read 10 tweets
16 Oct
De vertaler van het #JohnSnowMemorandum @DebbyBogaert die betekenissen verdraaide zodat het compatibel lijkt met Nederlands beleid heeft in het verleden gepubliceerd met @marcbonten en @MarionKoopmans. Is de vertaling afgestemd met OMT, @DebbyBogaert? pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28702305/
Read 5 tweets
15 Oct
#HerdImmunity explained:

Why won't the government end homelessness by just giving a place to live to every homeless person, as that would be cheaper better for society in general, even for the rich, by reducing crime etc?
Because the oppression of the underclass is foundational to neoliberal/capitalist societies, and improving infrastructure for public health / housing etc, although beneficial to all, would reduce inequality. Ruling elites benefit more from inequality than from public goods 2/5
This explains why right-wing governments don't view intentional crippling of public policies (housing, health, climate) as irrational. The elites are mostly shielded from its adverse effects anyway, lower classes bear the brunt of any deteroriation of public infrastructure 3/5
Read 7 tweets
14 Oct
Nieuwsuur: “De oppositie is wederom erg kritisch maar uiteindelijk steunt iedereen het kabinetsbeleid”
Jaap van Dissel, NieuwsUur: “Het gaat om anderhalve meter afstand, handen wassen, en thuis blijven bij klachten.”
Nu @bosmana. Pleit voor R van 0,7 ipv 0,9. Benieuwd a f de strategievraag ter sprake komt. (Ik denk het niet)
Read 4 tweets
14 Oct
Omdat ze WEL op gespannen voet staan bij pompend remmen tot het uitgeraasd is (mitigatie) en NIET als je containment doet (indammen)

Dat krijg je van het negeren van het strategievraagstuk @KustawBessems
Zei ik ook een half jaar geleden al tegen je @KustawBessems en daarna nog veel vaker
Ik klink een beetje gefrustreerd maar dat ben ik natuurlijk ook. Er is nog te weinig besef en begrip van de strategieverschillen zodat journaille en opiniemakers het begripsmatig instrumentarium ontberen om deze crisis te duiden
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!