Well they did that quietly. I wonder why? @shaynekrige, this must have been just days after the Scientists Collective assured us the evidence of masks was incontrovertible, in the process referring us to a study of two hairdressers. @dailymaverick, you need less corrupt experts.
In general the @WHO should simply have stuck to their 2019 pandemic influenza guidelines.
Come to think of it, the Scientists Collective also promoted the doctrine of WHO infallibility. Can you recall whether they were referring to the WHO in March, the WHO in September or the WHO in December?
And they referred us to fact checkers who couldn't even fact check their own funding. All in all, not much of a performance. This was our response article. dailyfriend.co.za/2020/12/07/a-f…

• • •

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

Keep Current with Nick Hudson 🙂

Nick Hudson 🙂 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!

PDF

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 @NickHudsonCT

11 Jan
1/ This will ruffle a few feathers, as it should.
2/ Let's remind ourselves of few basics: (1) Lockdowns were warned against by every relevant institution, including the WHO, whose last warning was refreshed as late as December 2019. (2) Since May, it has been nose-bleedingly obvious that Covid lockdowns produced no benefit.
3/ (3) Hard-pressed to say something in response to this lack of substance, three derisory papers have been produced and hustled through "peer review", but all made the same basic "rain dance" error. At least one of them was co-authored by a lockdown architect, Fergusson.
Read 6 tweets
7 Jan
Here is another very enjoyable conversation, with @Pandata19’s scientific advisory board member, Dr Jay Bhattacharya. Key ideas in this thread. 1/10
We are making world-changing decisions on the basis of evidence that is not very good. Vast scientific evidence tells us that infection fatality rates are much lower than originally expected. A small fraction of people get severe illness. 2/10
The scientific community has been resistant to evidence not supporting the majoritarian view, preferring instead to gin up panic, focusing on the worst case for everything the virus does & the best case for everything lockdowns do, and ignoring the range of uncertainty. 3/10
Read 10 tweets
3 Jan
I entered this conversation thinking that I already knew the story, in a way. Dr Wodarg had succeeded in preventing the WHO from creating a fake pandemic in 2009. He thought the world wasn't silly enough to be fooled twice, but he'd been wrong. 1/9 pandata.org/wolfgang-wodar…
He'd previously had ready access to mainstream media and found this suddenly cut off when he opened his mouth to voice his concern about the hysterical mania of Covid. The comically corrupt whom he'd vanquished all those years ago had been waiting for him. 2/9
All sorts of web entries about his courageous and humane career in public health and politics had morphed into caricatures that painted him as a freak; a "denier", as the post-modern parlance goes, with no means of redress. 3/9
Read 10 tweets
30 Dec 20
“When the law is unjust, violating it is not only justified as legitimate, it is exalted as heroic.”

The regulations are absurd, from masks, to curfews, to closures. People see they’re ineffective & destructive & they are disobeying, as they all should. businesslive.co.za/fm/opinion/pro…
We have state capture, media capture and corrupt science all participating in this tragic miscarriage of justice, this terrorizing and brutalizing of ordinary people. Democracy lies in ruins, there is no debate and no chance to question and demand answers.
Every citizen has an ethical obligation to resist. Complicit politicians, journalists and scientists will have their day of reckoning. The rest of us need to be on the right side of history.
Read 6 tweets
23 Dec 20
Before you decide that you’re worried about that new “mutation”, please listen to professor of virology, Vincent Racaniello, replacing governmental bad science with some good science. 1/7
Some key points: No reason to expect greater transmissibility, a change in the ages of people at risk or greater virulence. This is neither a mutation nor a new strain. 2/7
Epidemiological measurement is not a sound basis for assessing the impact of the changes. 3/7
Read 8 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!