2. HUMANS RELEASE AEROSOLS DURING NORMAL PHYSIOLOGICAL ACTIVITIES WHICH RESULT IN SUFFICIENT ENVIRONMENTAL AIR CONTAMINATION TO CAUSE INFECTION VIA INHALATION
“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.’
‘…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?