“This slow & gradualist [lockdown] approach was not inadvertent, nor did it reflect bureaucratic delay / disagreement between ministers & advisers. It was a deliberate policy – proposed by official scientific advisers & adopted by the governments of all of the nations of the UK”
‘The report questions why international experts were not part of the UK scientific advisory process & why measures that worked in other countries were not brought in as a precaution, as a response was hammered out.’
Re: 👆
Very worrying is the fact that during one of @uksciencechief’s testimony sessions [I watched them all - transcripts now available] he explained that he & @CMO_England were in regular contact with the corresponding CMOs of other [SARS expert] nations’.
Not listening. 😷
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2. HUMANS RELEASE AEROSOLS DURING NORMAL PHYSIOLOGICAL ACTIVITIES WHICH RESULT IN SUFFICIENT ENVIRONMENTAL AIR CONTAMINATION TO CAUSE INFECTION VIA INHALATION
‘…ask yourself if the authors are truly trying to inform their readers or if they are instead trying to advance a narrative that would be undermined if they fully enumerated how COVID-19 has harmed children.’
/1
The language (tending towards hyperbole - my interpretation) here is not that of a scientist, but we’re none of us free from this, I guess! @dgurdasani1 like you I’m concerned about this PHE-derived narrative, particularly when conclusions defy physical laws.
/1
‘Antibody seroprevalence rates in students & staff were generally similar to regional community rates, both at the start & end of the Autumn term, albeit with wide confidence intervals.’
Looks like ‘direction’ of infection from students over time, no?
/2
Physical laws:
1. Is there any difference in SARS-CoV-2 viral load comparing children & adults?