Many MPs who supported the assisted suicide bill at 2nd reading were motivated by people dying in pain but also worried about pressure being put on vulnerable people. In response the Bill Committee has decided:

1. Not to include pain as a criteria for assisted suicide.
... ...
2. Not to protect homeless people or prisoners from assisted suicide, despite evidence both groups are particularly vulnerable to suicide.

3. Not to protect people requesting suicide because they feel they are a burden on others.
...

🧵
Just because @KimLeadbeater asserts the slippery slope can’t happen does not make it true.

Let’s spell out how the slippery slope may operate in principle & practice:
... ...
If the #assistedsuicide bill passes, MPs will have accepted the *principle* that it is okay to help some groups of people commit suicide.

With that principle established, the question becomes which group of people should be included.
...

Let’s talk about Oregon: a good model to follow according to Leadbeater assisted suicide bill supporters.

After legalisation, the numbers of assisted suicides skyrocketed from 16 in 1998 to 367 in 2023.

If Eng & Wales end up at same rate that's over 5,000 people each year.
... …
The huge increase in assisted suicides has not led to a reduction in other suicides (this is one of the issues @kimleadbeater claims her Bill will address):

the rate of unassisted suicide in Oregon has increased by more than 20% since 1998.
…

The @Channel4 @reformparty_uk racism row is developing into an astonishing story. Whether or not Ch 4 paid Andrew Parker, hard to see how they can come out unscathed.

As I see it, there are 4 possibilities:

1. @Channel4 set up & paid Parker. They are explicit they did not.
... ...
2. Someone else (production company or a 3rd party) paid Parker.

If @Channel4 knew, this is as bad as Option 1.

If Ch 4 didn't know, it means they did no due diligence.
For such a consequential story, that would be grossly irresponsible & must lead to consequences.
...

What action should be taken about @SuellaBraverman's @thetimes article alleging bias in policing?

I suggest four things that might be done:

1. The police commit immediately to stop arresting people for praying silently in their own minds.
...

…
2. The police commit immediately to stop intimidating people for expressing perfectly legitimate views about transgender issues.
...

An objective examination of the data and evidence suggests that delaying the March 25 lockdown decision by a week or so would have saved lives.

Here’s why … …
We know from deaths data, NHS Triage and React that infections were almost certainly decreasing well before 25 March (and the rise in infections was levelling off even earlier). But those data were not available by the 25th.
...

The Scottish Covid Inquiry commissioned an independent expert (Dr Ashley Croft) to report on “the accepted scientific & medical understanding” of Covid-19.

This is his conclusion on the evidence of interventions aimed at limiting spread:
… …
For face mask mandates outside of healthcare settings, lockdowns, social distancing, test, trace and isolate measures:

"there was either insufficient evidence in 2020 to support their use – or alternatively, no evidence”
...

A problem with this poll is that many "net zero" policies are the opposite of green. For example:

Onshore wind farms (noise pollution, bird killers, recycling difficulties when decommissioned).
...

https://twitter.com/MartinSLewis/status/1683425091269406720?s=20

...
Converting Coal-fired Drax to burning wood pellets imported from the US.
...
theguardian.com/business/2023/…

A summary of what happened with baby Lily:

@BPAS1968 & pro-abortion MPs campaigned successfully to be able to to send out abortion pills without any in-person consultation.

@BPAS1968 then sent out pills w/o doing any checks to ensure the mother was within the 10-week limit.
… …
Carla Foster took the pills & Lily (nearly 8 months after conception) died.

The mother was distraught, deeply regretting the death of her baby & has been imprisoned.

i.e. @BPAS1968 actions led to the death of an innocent baby girl & the devastation of a woman’s life.
…

The reaction to @DrAseemMalhotra measured questions about risks of Covid-19 vaccines is telling.

Instead of looking at the evidence & debating, prominent scientists plus media like @Guardian & @theTimes have focused on complaining about Dr Malhotra being given a voice at all.
… …
These scientists & journalists are repeating the same mistakes of past 2 years and which have contributed to a huge loss of public trust in vaccination & broader public health messaging.
...

This morning on @BBC5live, @trishgreenhalgh stated:
“when we first introduced mask mandates in July 2020 cases were going up very, very rapidly & then the mask mandate brought them under control within weeks”

This is flat out wrong.
… …
Here is the trend in Covid-19 cases in England before & after the 24 July mask mandate.
Cases were not going up “very, very fast” when the mandate came in. However, they did start going up fast a few weeks after the mandate!
Similar trend with ONS infection survey data.
…

Many people worry that Covid-19 vaccines have a worse safety record than other common vaccines.

ONS mortality statistics suggest these concerns may be justified.
… …
ONS report deaths where vaccination was listed on the death certificate as the underlying cause. These are from death registration data which means there can be quite a long delay especially where there is a coroner’s investigation.
…

New paper in Vaccine finds:
“paradoxically, despite the success of Covid-19 vaccination campaigns, vaccine confidence has significantly declined since the pandemic.”

No surprise, but let’s be clear, the decline is not *despite* but *because* of the Covid-19 vaccine campaign.
… …
If you bully, harass and coerce people to get a vaccine (especially a new one), we shouldn’t be surprised that they become more sceptical about whether vaccination is really in their best interest.
…

Good @spectator debate recently on Lockdown 1.
@FraserNelson asks if pre-23 March measures were *sufficient* to stop infections increasing.

That seems to me a leading q. That LD was unnecessary does not in itself mean earlier measures were effective.
…

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1566101071612739584?s=20&t=9pmZF_AWOa_9lpAHA7LC3w

…
A better question is were even pre-LD restrictions necessary to stop infections increasing exponentially?

The answer is no: slowdown in infection growth started early March, before even school closures & guidance for pubs to shut.
More detail⬇️
...

https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1567069407477698561?s=20&t=gkoFlMn4rnYuVinM2wESPA

Frustratingly, some are still trying to claim English Lockdown 1 was necessary as infections increasing *exponentially* until 23 March. In fact:
• strong evidence infections were decreasing by then
and
• certainty infections were not increasing exponentially.

More detail⬇️
… …
Prof Simon Wood has already shown how, backtracking from deaths (which peaked on 8 April) infections were almost certainly decreasing before 23 March (see: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…).

But we can get the same result by looking at ICU data …

The Spanish pre-print study on facemasks in School has now been published in peer-reviewed BMJ Archives Diseases in Childhood. Conclusion:
"We found no significant differences in SARS-CoV-2 transmission due to face-covering mask mandates in schools."
...
adc.bmj.com/content/early/… ...
Note this is not an RCT but uses next best thing: "quasi-experimental design" comparing top pre-school year group (P5) with 1st school year group (Yr 1). Both groups share the same buildings & only Covid-19 policy difference between them was the mandate.
...

This @FraserNelson article is a good reminder that throughout the pandemic we had journalists prepared to ask questions & hold politicians to account.
@thelucyjohnston @AllisonPearson @JuliaHB1 @IsabelOakeshott @danwootton & others did the same ...
telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/08/1… …
Unfortunately the same can’t be said for most journalists, especially those who were prominent at Covid-19 press conferences.
Almost without exception, questions were “why not earlier & more restrictions?” & hardly ever “where is the evidence this restriction works?”
…

A lot of Covid-19 policy around the world (no longer in the UK thank goodness) continues to be predicated on the basis that unvaccinated people are more likely to have Covid than those vaccinated. All the evidence we have currently suggests that is not the case.
… …
This is different to saying vaccination reduces risk of infection which is what Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) studies estimate: latest UKHSA evidence summary suggests still some risk reduction against infection, albeit modest & doesn’t last long.
...
gov.uk/government/pub…

This article by @tomhcalver is excellent in setting out the huge cost of lockdown for so many people.
However, the evidence is just not there to support the assertion in the article that "Lockdowns saved tens of thousands of lives".
...
thetimes.co.uk/article/lockdo… …
Only a few studies have examined the impact of lockdowns on excess deaths (i.e. including Covid + non-Covid), but these generally conclude that if anything, lockdowns contributed to an *increase* in mortality.
See tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.10…
and nber.org/papers/w28930
…

This paper in Frontiers in Public Health is the most recent & comprehensive study of Covid restrictions (NPIs). They look at 10 NPIs in 169 countries. Conclusion:
‘None of the NPIs had a substantial & consistent effect on Covid-19 deaths over time’
…
frontiersin.org/articles/10.33… …
Some more detail.

On their graphs:
• Dots/dashes: alternative estimates of what would’ve happened if no NPI.
• If bold line below these, indicates NPI reduced deaths.
• Grey area: 95% CIs. i.e. if dotted/dashed lines within this, effect not statistically significant.
…

Putting ethics to one side, a key assumption in this argument for taxing the vaccinated is that "it is reasonable to believe" deciding against Covid-19 vaccination causes very significant harm.

But is that actually a reasonable belief?
...
oxfordtax.sbs.ox.ac.uk/article/taxing… …
The authors point to two possible harms.

Potential harm 1: “externality”, i.e. increased risk of infecting others.

There's not much evidence for this now. E.g. latest ONS analysis shows *no* significant protection against infection from 2 doses: ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulati…