Some extracts from the Weimar judgment on masks, asymptomatic transmission and PCR testing (link below).
On the absence of evidence that mask mandates make any material difference to transmission...
...see also the absence of any correlation between their imposition and change in the rate of growth of transmission).
On the absence of evidence that social distancing between two asymptomatic people has any effect on transmission:
Because asymptomatic transmission is a myth not based on evidence:
On PCR testing and the - accepted (see Dr Fauci last year) - fact that cycles of over 35 do not reveal live viral matter and those of 25-34 need confirmation by being matched with viral cultivation.
On misleadingly using the term ‘incidence’ to report people repeatedly tested.
Conclusion on the use of PCR tests.
And the judge’s last words speak for themselves.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I’m happy to answer it. Yes. Because by ‘protecting the NHS’, what you actually mean is that it would be unable to treat some-perhaps many-people. And yet you ignore the fact that the NHS turned people out of its hospitals while deaths from stroke & cardio went through the roof.
We can reasonably surmise that that was for one or more of three reasons: that they or others were too scared to call ambulances; that the PPE procedures for paramedics slow down their response times that are critical to survival;...
... and that too little resources were given them *by choice*, not necessity.
(The second I say having spoken to a paramedic who knows that happens.)
Forget evidence of efficacy taken from the use of masks in clinical conditions. Forget even the Danmask study (showing no statistical significant difference in infection rates for mask wearers).
Where in the world has a mask mandate affected the growth of infections or deaths?
‘Social distancing’ is a made up measure that featured in no pandemic planning&whose efficacy has never been tested. It is entirely reliant on the lie that asymptomatic transmission is a major driver of infection.
This has nothing to with the virus & everything to do with control
Why don’t you - or the @BBCNews that made the show - question him about the abysmal standards in the laboratories exposed by Panorama, risking the contamination of numerous samples by ‘fragments’ of viral matter?
Or that PCR tests, at 45 cycles, have numerous false positives?
Even Fauci said that anything over 35 does not pick up live viral matter but the remnants of a virus that was - but is no longer - infectious. Yet this issue is never examined by those whose duty it is to scrutinise the government.
And the expansion of testing and engagement of numerous poorly trained staff at labs that don’t give a damn about accuracy will inevitably exacerbate both (a) the proportion of ‘positives’ of ppl who were but are no longer infectious and (b) the number of contaminated results.
The reality is that this this is not because of measures but because people generally don’t go to the pub when ill (especially now) and that there is no reliable evidence for asymptomatic transmission.