If my current project isn't clear, I'm working on understanding and evaluating the hypotheses put forth by @GVDBossche. As things start to go sideways I'm suspecting that he may have been right about a lot, but with a hypothesis that rich, it takes work to make conclusions. 🧵
Like many, I was first exposed to Geert's ideas through his interview with @BretWeinstein:
My most recent reintroduction to Geert's thoughts is this blogpost is putting together a hypothesis that is largely aligned with Geert Vanden Bossche to the degree I understand both..
Meditating on that, I started to wonder if Delta is more lethal, when comparing like for like patients. Good data is hard to come by, but every line of evidence I could see goes the same direction: yes.
Thinking about this more, I realized the emergence of Delta matters quite a bit, and so I dug more into that, with quite surprising (or not?) results...
What should I dig into next? Are there predictions Geert has made that have been validated? Or falsified? It's been fascinating to investigate so far and I'm learning quite a bit about the immune system...
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
What does it mean when we call someone an expert? Here's what Google says:
"a person who has a comprehensive and authoritative knowledge of or skill in a particular area".
In this one word I think we will find the root of our troubles: 🧵
So if someone is an expert in virology, that means they have comprehensive & authoritative knowledge of virology.
But what does comprehensive knowledge of an area mean? It means to be complete.
We're expecting our scientists to claim complete knowledge of an area.
At the same time, we know that experts in the same area of a decade ago, or 50 years ago, certainly did not have complete knowledge of that area, since we've made large breakthroughs since. Are we assuming no more breakthroughs are possible?
Wow. Talk about a thread that says the exact opposite of the paper it cites. Comments🔥. 📄Quote:
"Transmission reductions declined over time since 2nd vaccination, for Delta reaching similar levels to unvaccinated by 12 weeks for ChAdOx1 & attenuating substantially for BNT162b2"
Your daily reminder that I have no idea on biology and if I can find complete and total misrepresentations within seconds of looking at a paper that a supposed public health communicator is touting, things are entirely not OK. This is not what one resorts to when one is winning.
🤣 @fiddlebits donated to the FLCCC in honor of @hang_a_shore's constructive comment below, and now I have no choice: I have to follow through with a "donate and block" fundraiser. The people have spoken!
Holy shit, I just noticed the subtitle of this image. OK folks, we have to get to the bottom of the whole "variants emerged due to vaccine trials" claim. Has anyone chased this down, other than the original correlation GISAID images?
2. "Hospital admission and emergency care attendance risk for SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) compared with alpha (B.1.1.7) variants of concern: a cohort study" (h/t @JoomiKim1)