The PCR debacle, operation Moonshot, masks, school closures, ruined health, futures and incomes, liberties... All spring forth from our underlying beliefs about the virus. These issues, important as they are, distract our attention from the most important questions of all...
...No one denies that it's a nasty virus that can be lethal. I know people who've suffered with it. I also know plenty who've had horrible experiences with other things too (often caused by the avoidable actions of people). There's no risk-free option...
...It was claimed approx 500K people in the UK & 2M in USA would die, (~0.5-1% of the population). On that basis we closed much of the world.
But, even the hardest hit countries lost roughly one tenth of that number of people (& that despite the differences in measures taken)...
...You can - you should - look those numbers up for yourself.
It looks like we overestimated the problem by something like ten times. If we'd known that earlier (some did), most of this need never have happened.
This ought to change everything.
So why doesn't it?
Footnote: Again, for those who would criticise, the thoughts, opinions and errors are mine. But the data are the data. I don't deny Covid. I know people who've suffered & have vulnerable relatives who have, quite sensibly, been very cautious. None of that changes the above.
"Antibodies, after all, are just one facet of the body's complex immune system"
Many act as if this is not the case. & yet, even with minimal immunological knowledge, the idea that antibodies might be the full story is disproved by observed reality.
"the new study indicated that other factors like T cells showed only a slight decay several months out from infection, while B cells, which produce new antibodies as needed, had actually grown in number in most participants"
CZECH REPUBLIC & OTHER EUROPEAN
HIGHER FATALITY COUNTRIES
(thread)
Signs of Czech Rep deaths slowing? I wish them well. Interesting, yet again, that the cumulative total is so similar to other hard hit locations, which are all around 10x lower than generally used predictions...
The point is not to use these data for some ugly competition. Rather, these data and their differences - or similarities - can reveal very important information about #SARSCoV2 .
For example, UK deaths were predicted to reach ~7500 per Million (=~500k people, without measures).
However, if the hypotheses that led to such predictions were true, & such totals have only been averted by lockdown, then one would expect large variations between countries (as exact details & timing of lockdown and other measures would be critical).
"Professor J Savulescu from the University of Oxford said incentives would help to overcome rising vaccine hesitancy due to perceived safety concerns... he writes in the Journal of Medical Ethics."
Take the vaccine & get cash or a "get out of mask free" card.
Medical Ethics?!?!
The idea of offering someone you've half scared to death and have deprived of normal life (and much more) a partial release from the madness, or some cash, if they agree to accept the risk of a vaccine does not belong in anything that has the word "ethics" in it's title.
Unsurprisingly, also from the same article,
"Prof Savulescu says that there is a case for mandatory vaccination because of the "grave" threat to public health."
"Covid: Nine ways England's lockdown is different from last time" - BBC
UK truly leads the world when it comes to freedom. Behold 9 incredible advances we've made this year. You never had it so good!
Here's the list:
...
1. You can meet one friend... with your children. 2. Schools and universities are staying open. 3. Public toilets will not be closed 4. 'Bubbles' exist 5. Click and collect services will be available
6. Sitting on a bench is allowed 7. You can take unlimited exercise 8. Dentist and opticians are staying open 9. Nobody will formally shield
"Coronavirus: T-cell immunity exists six months after infection, study finds" - Sky
This must come as quite a shock. Who'd have thought there could be more to immunity than antibody levels?
Of course that's not the whole article...
The article goes on to say...
"But the researchers, from Public Health England and the UK Coronavirus Immunity Consortium, warn that it's still not clear whether the T-cell levels were high enough to protect against re-infection."
I suggest refering to known science as a starting point. There used to be quite a lot of it around, although we seem to have mislaid it recently.
What actually matters though is not just the probability of succumbing to the virus if infected but also the probability of becoming infected in the first place.
Population Fatality Rate (PFR) = probability of infection X IFR