Read on Twitter
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9131383/amp/Professor-Lockdown-Neil-Ferguson-believes-London-herd-immunity.html
Quite a surprise. Ferguson isn’t qualified to comment on such things. He lacks understanding of basic biological concepts, partly explaining why his predictions are often so extreme.
Quite a surprise. Ferguson isn’t qualified to comment on such things. He lacks understanding of basic biological concepts, partly explaining why his predictions are often so extreme.
That said, I’ll take him as an ally. It’s clear we’re already at herd immunity. How can I be sure? London had a huge peak of excess deaths in spring. The timing of peak deaths showed clearly that the pandemic was self-limiting. Recall much debate about whether the interval...
...between lockdown & peak deaths was long enough for lockdown to have been the cause of reducing deaths? The answer was “no”. But it was close & I can understand people thinking “well, it’s close, so perhaps it was lockdown that did it?”, thereby establishing a foundational...
...myth favoured by those who genuinely believe lockdown saves lives (it clearly doesn’t).
I’ll get to London & here immunity. But those wavering about the evidence about lockdown in spring really will benefit from cogitating on this graph.
I’ll get to London & here immunity. But those wavering about the evidence about lockdown in spring really will benefit from cogitating on this graph.
In blue are the 30 trusts with the earliest date of peak deaths in spring. In red, the 30 with the latest peak deaths. For me, this is proof that national lockdown, which began Mar 23, played no role whatsoever in turning the pandemic. You’ll see some areas had peak daily...
...deaths numbers occur before lockdown. Others so close to lockdown that obviously the intervention was far too close to peak daily deaths that lockdown can’t even have contributed to turning the pandemic. Even harder for pro-lockdown folk is the marked range in dates of peak...
...daily deaths across the country. The lockdown thesis is that this intervention sufficiently reduced social contacts that the spread of the virus was abruptly slowed & that pushed Rt below 1. That’s what saved us. But if that was even close to what happened, the dates of peak..
...daily deaths would be close together in time, perhaps a few days variation. That’s not what we see. Looking at the trusts with earliest to latest peak daily deaths we see variation of a whole month. Furthermore, the trusts with earliest turning points are mostly London and...
...those with latest turning points furthest from London. I can conceive of no crisper evidence that (1) lockdown was not responsible for turning the spring pandemic & therefore (2) something else was responsible for the abrupt turning of the pandemic. As yet, no one, not SAGE...
...nor anyone else has come up with an explanation for this data that doesn’t involve a rapidly reducing proportion of the population who remain susceptible to the virus, aka herd immunity.
What this means is that almost all of U.K. experienced what’s called unmitigated...
What this means is that almost all of U.K. experienced what’s called unmitigated...
...spreading of the virus. Just like Sweden. It’s not surprising then that we’ve ended up with identical population fatality (0.08%).
Back to London. Three months ago, I wrote a detailed article which contained several predictions.
https://lockdownsceptics.org/what-sage-got-wrong/
Back to London. Three months ago, I wrote a detailed article which contained several predictions.
https://lockdownsceptics.org/what-sage-got-wrong/
At the heart of things, I laid out why SAGE’s advice to Govt was seriously in error. If SAGE was correct, we’d expect the pandemic to resume in a similar pattern to spring, the deaths to increase in the typical respiratory virus pattern of a clear spike & importantly for excess..
...deaths in London to be marked (it was the epicentre in spring). For this next part, I recommend we set to one side for a moment the label “covid19 deaths”, because there’s some controversy about the reliability of PCR mass testing. Prof Whitty himself guided us to look at...
...excess deaths as the best indication of progress of the virus. So let’s do that. London has not had excess deaths at all this autumn & winter. That means SAGE was flatly wrong & without crowing it turns out I was closer in my prediction. Here’s the official data. Note that...
...the data is sufficiently sensitive a record to pick out the deaths associated with the August heatwave. But the daily deaths are not greater than the five year average all the way through autumn & winter. I agree with Prof Ferguson. But he’s months off the pace. The data...
...was unequivocal that SAGE’s narrative has been demonstrably wrong by early summer last year. Once it’s realised that lockdown 1 wasn’t the force that turned the pandemic in spring, lots of other things we’ve been told cannot be true. I’m willing to ascribe their errors to...
...ignorance. They didn’t have an immunologist on their team in spring. So what is obvious to me might not even have crossed their minds or entered into their mathematical models.
SAGE’s errors unfortunately have been compounded & their mistaken narrative is gradually destroying
SAGE’s errors unfortunately have been compounded & their mistaken narrative is gradually destroying
...the country in every way. Remember the other predictions I made & how they contrast with reasonable inferences from SAGE’s position? I predicted what I termed a #SecondaryRipple which was characterised by regional outbreaks which would be self-limiting & overall excess...
...deaths rather modest compared with spring. Again, let’s follow Whitty’s advice to be guided by excess deaths & not labelling of cause of deaths (because total deaths is agreed to be objective). What we’ve seen in autumn & winter is a slow ramp of excess deaths. This is...
...because each mini outbreak is uncoordinated in time across the country. And the total excess deaths has been small compared with spring. In fact, recent PHE weekly reports have shown low to no excess deaths.
This is completely consistent with national herd immunity, with local self limiting outbreaks possible but impossible to see a widespread & growing epidemic. Note that official data shows there is no public health emergency due to the virus. I’m not going to get into the whole...
...business of misattribution of cause of death due to untrustworthy PCR mass testing again (yesterday’s thread covered that). Please follow Whitty’s advice & be guided by excess deaths. Once you do that, the whole position is seen for what it is: a reality in complete contrast..
...with the narrative of fear. I’ll close by again encouraging those at elevated risk of severe outcomes from the virus to consider getting vaccinated. It isn’t wise to do so if you’re not at elevated risk. I also repeat my demand that mass testing of the population ceases. It...
...is simply not necessary & because of unknown unreliability, I believe it’s main product is false positives, fear & superfluous ‘control measures’ which don’t work, while hurting everyone.
If anyone on SAGE reads this, please look to your conscience & alter course.
If anyone on SAGE reads this, please look to your conscience & alter course.
