Study that led to current lock down policies

[JohnQPublic]

Here is the study that led to current containment policy. I have not read it, but it is also summarized in a Twitter thread. It describes the strategy to "flatten the curve".

STUDY: https://t.co/AwE2cHIbeJ?amp=1

Twitter Summary: https://twitter.com/jeremycyoung/status/1239975682643357696?s=20

[midnight rambler]

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1239975682643357696.html (https://twitter.com/jeremycyoung/status/1239975682643357696)

[JohnQPublic]

"Technology – such as mobile phone apps that track an individual’s interactions with other people in society – might allow such a policy to be more effective and scalable if the associated privacy concerns can be overcome."

[JohnQPublic]

If you look at the curves, no matter what they do the prediction is it pops back up again. The only possible remedy is a rushed vaccine by year end.

They keep showing the flattened curve, but they do not show that after the flattening- it spikes again. Then of course they talk about the vaccine...

[midnight rambler]

If you look at the curves, no matter what they do the prediction is it pops back up again. The only possible remedy is a rushed vaccine by year end.

Or herd immunity, if that is even possible with this man-made virus.

Would you trust the same bunch of assholes who got us into this mess to provide a safe vaccine??

[JohnQPublic]

Or herd immunity, if that is even possible with this man-made virus.

Would you trust the same bunch of assholes who got us into this mess to provide a safe vaccine??

Not sure, but that is what the simulation is saying. Of course it is a simulation. Not sure how accurate it turns out to be. Maybe the hope is by locking everyone away, it diminishes much faster and completely than expected. Of course "Hope" did not work well under Obama.

[midnight rambler]

Not sure, but that is what the simulation is saying. Of course it is a simulation. Not sure how accurate it turns out to be. Maybe the hope is by locking everyone away, it diminishes much faster and completely than expected. Of course "Hope" did not work well under Obama.

The goal is not to suppress the disease and mitigate the damage as much damage as possible, but to use it as an excuse to totally change the world as we know it. The globalists want their wet dream/our nightmare to come true with as much death and destruction as possible, and right now it appears they are right on track with their plans - total control of their slave population.

[mamboni]

There is an alternative to population controls and economic shutdown. What all the folk who suffer the worst effects of covid9 infection have in common is nutritionally deficient toxin loaded bodies. These correlate with increasing age and chronic disease states. No one whose body is replete with the 90 essential nutrients and obtains a balanced diet free of sugar, gluten, trans fats and oxidized oils will suffer anything more than some sniffles and a slight cough if infected. Further, immunity can be greatly boosted by fortifying the diet with the following:
selenium 200 mcg vitamin c 1-2 grams in divided doses zinc gluconate 20-50 mg vitamin d3. 5000 iu
these are daily dosages. This is what I do routinely. If everyone did nothing else but took in Tangy Tangerine at the recommended dosage it would surely reduce morbidity and mortality by 80-90%.

Why are our leaders in health not telling us this?

[vacuum]

Twitter Summary: https://twitter.com/jeremycyoung/status/1239975682643357696?s=20

I was just reading through this thread.

Basically, if we do nothing, they estimate 4 million Americans would die.

Everyone needs to take the time to read through this thread.

The lockdowns are going to be here for the next 18 months or so based on this twitter thread.

Of course, multiple other solutions could manifest themselves between now and then. But that is the scale of time we're looking at.

[Neuro]

"Technology – such as mobile phone apps that track an individual’s interactions with other people in society – might allow such a policy to be more effective and scalable if the associated privacy concerns can be overcome."

Yes now they have the right reasons for tracking everyone all the time. Big Brother state, and it is welcomed by most “reasonable people”.

[ziero0]

It started 50 years ago. They came up with SPF hogs. Specific parasite free. They got the first SPF hogs by C-section. The parasites they were free of were bypassed by not traveling down the birth canal. SPF people come into the world the same way.

The problem with SPF hogs (and people) is they lack an imune system and have to be protected from germs and viruses. Farmers had to raise the hogs in confinement buildings with nets over the openings to keep birds from bringing in disease. Visitors were discouraged. Workers wore clean clothes and took showers.

C-section parents be forewarned. You would be advised to take your newborn to a subway and let him crawl around on the floor.

[Tumbleweed]

I don't trust our government or the pharmaceutical companies because of what they've done over the years. They have put live viruses in vaccine for cattle and have been caught doing it. Ranchers caught them and they settled out of court and it was all hushed up but they'd put diseases out there that we now have to vaccinate for. They sell us the poison and then we have to buy the antidote and I've spent thousands on those antidotes after I'd given the vaccine/poison. We are forced to give the vaccines or suffer a huge discount when we sell them.

I read yesterday on one of the reports somewhere they'd done something similar with the bird flu vaccine by putting live virus in the vaccine. Just enough to get the disease going then selling more vaccine and the antidote to the poison. Poisoning white people is probably the easiest way for the NWO to get rid of us and a vaccine we're forced to take could probably do the job.

[madfranks]

There is an alternative to population controls and economic shutdown. What all the folk who suffer the worst effects of covid9 infection have in common is nutritionally deficient toxin loaded bodies. These correlate with increasing age and chronic disease states. No one whose body is replete with the 90 essential nutrients and obtains a balanced diet free of sugar, gluten, trans fats and oxidized oils will suffer anything more than some sniffles and a slight cough if infected. Further, immunity can be greatly boosted by fortifying the diet with the following:
selenium 200 mcg vitamin c 1-2 grams in divided doses zinc gluconate 20-50 mg vitamin d3. 5000 iu
these are daily dosages. This is what I do routinely. If everyone did nothing else but took in Tangy Tangerine at the recommended dosage it would surely reduce morbidity and mortality by 80-90%.

Why are our leaders in health not telling us this?Because the FDA doesn't recognize vitamins as providing any known health benefits?

[BrewTech]

Because the FDA doesn't recognize vitamins as providing any known health benefits?

Because good health doesn't have anything to do with disease resistance. Duh.

[keehah]

The Post: Nobel prize-winning scientist: the Covid-19 epidemic was never exponential (https://unherd.com/thepost/nobel-prize-winning-scientist-the-covid-19-epidemic-was-never-exponential/)

May 2
As he is careful to point out, Professor Michael Levitt is not an epidemiologist. He’s Professor of Structural Biology at the Stanford School of Medicine, and winner of the 2013 Nobel Prize for Chemistry for “the development of multiscale models for complex chemical systems.” He’s a numbers guy — as he told us in our interview, his wife says he loves numbers more than her — but then, much of modern science is really about statistics (as his detractors never tire of pointing out, Professor Neil Ferguson is a theoretical physicist by training).

With a purely statistical perspective, he has been playing close attention to the Covid-19 pandemic since January, when most of us were not even aware of it. He first spoke out in early February, when through analysing the numbers of cases and deaths in Hubei province he predicted with remarkable accuracy that the epidemic in that province would top out at around 3,250 deaths.

His observation is a simple one: that in outbreak after outbreak of this disease, a similar mathematical pattern is observable regardless of government interventions. After around a two week exponential growth of cases (and, subsequently, deaths) some kind of break kicks in, and growth starts slowing down. The curve quickly becomes “sub-exponential”.

This may seem like a technical distinction, but its implications are profound. The ‘unmitigated’ scenarios modelled by (among others) Imperial College, and which tilted governments across the world into drastic action, relied on a presumption of continued exponential growth — that with a consistent R number of significantly above 1 and a consistent death rate, very quickly the majority of the population would be infected and huge numbers of deaths would be recorded. But Professor Levitt’s point is that that hasn’t actually happened anywhere, even in countries that have been relatively lax in their responses.

He takes specific issue with the Neil Ferguson paper. “In a footnote to a table it said, assuming exponential growth of 15% for six days. Now I had looked at China and had never seen exponential growth that wasn’t decaying rapidly.”

The explanation for this flattening that we are used to is that social distancing and lockdowns have slowed the curve, but he is unconvinced. As he put it to me, in the subsequent examples to China of South Korea, Iran and Italy, “the beginning of the epidemics showed a slowing down and it was very hard for me to believe that those three countries could practise social distancing as well as China.” He believes that both some degree of prior immunity and large numbers of asymptomatic cases are important factors.

He also observes that the total number of deaths we are seeing, in places as diverse as New York City, parts of England, parts of France and Northern Italy, all seem to level out at a very similar fraction of the total population. “Are they all practising equally good social distancing? I don’t think so.” He disagrees with Sir David Spiegelhalter’s calculations that the totem is around one additional year of excess deaths, while (by adjusting to match the effects seen on the quarantined Diamond Princess cruise ship) he calculates that it is more like one month of excess death that is need before the virus peters out.

More generally, he complains that epidemiologists only seem to be called wrong if they underestimate deaths, and so there is an intrinsic bias towards caution. “They see their role as scaring people into doing something, and I understand that… but in my work, if I say a number is too small and I’m wrong, or too big and I’m wrong, both of those errors are the same.”

He believes the much-discussed R0 [the average number of people who will contract a contagious disease from one person with that disease] is a faulty number, as it is meaningless without the time infectious alongside.

He describes indiscriminate lockdown measures as “a huge mistake,” and advocates a “smart lockdown” policy, focused on more effective measures, focused on protecting elderly people...


I think the policy of herd immunity is the right policy. I think Britain was on exactly the right track before they were fed wrong numbers. And they made a huge mistake. I see the standout winners as Germany and Sweden. They didn’t practise too much lockdown and they got enough people sick to get some herd immunity. I see the standout losers as countries like Austria, Australia and Israel that had very strict lockdown but didn’t have many cases. They have damaged their economies, caused massive social damage, damaged the educational year of their children, but not obtained any herd immunity.
“There is no doubt in my mind, that when we come to look back on this, the damage done by lockdown will exceed any saving of lives by a huge factor.
- PROFESSOR MICHAEL LEVITT

[keehah]

Here is the study that led to current containment policy.

Study:
Report 9: Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand
Neil M Ferguson....etal

Justice! (LOL)

DailyMailUK: Government scientist Neil Ferguson, 51 - whose death toll projections sparked lockdown - QUITS after admitting he allowed married mistress, 38, to break stay-at-home rules to visit him for trysts (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8289921/Scientist-advice-led-lockdown-QUITS-breaking-restrictions-meet-married-lover.html)

Professor Neil Ferguson was branded an ‘arrogant hypocrite’ today for catastrophically 'undermining' the government’s position by flouting the strict coronavirus social distancing rules he helped draw up to have secret trysts with his married lover.

The shamed scientist, nicknamed 'Professor Lockdown' because he convinced Boris Johnson to order millions to stay at home, has sensationally quit his Government role on the influential SAGE committee - but his employer Imperial College London is standing by him.

Professor Ferguson, 51, asked his mistress Antonia Staats, 38, to travel across London to his home at least twice despite lecturing 66million in Britain on the need to stay apart to stop the spread of the killer virus. The scandal broke last night and critics have said he 'undermined the government's lockdown message' on one of the darkest days of the pandemic when the ONS said Britain's death toll climbed to 32,375 people - the highest in Europe.

In a resignation statement last night, the academic, who is married with a son but is believed to be separated from his wife, admitted he had 'made an error of judgement' but claimed he thought he was 'immune' to the illness - despite leading scientists and the World Health Organisation saying there is still not enough evidence recovering from Covid-19 can protect you from reinfection.

[Amanda]

Is Imperial College Still Open for Business?

Gilad Atzmon (https://www.unz.com/author/gilad-atzmon/) • May 4, 2020

https://www.unz.com/gatzmon/is-imperial-college-still-open-for-business/

Back in the 1960s, the British academic establishment was rather excited about the work of Karl Popper, the philosopher who developed the concept of empirical falsification. Popper was keen to define the demarcation between the scientific and that which only mimics empiricism and scientism. A theory, according to Popper, can be considered scientific if, and only if, it is potentially falsifiable by experiments or its predictions. Popper attempted to create criteria that would deny psychoanalysis, Marxism and astrology any scientific status based on the fact that these theories are not falsifiable.

One may wonder what Popper would have to say about the ‘science’ of Neil Ferguson, the man who predicted up to 550.000 Coronavirus dead in the UK and 2.2 million dead in the USA.

On 29 April, Off-Guardian (https://off-guardian.org/2020/04/29/lokin-20-the-lockdown-regime-causes-increasing-health-concerns/) published what I believe to be the most insightful criticism of the lockdown policy so far. In the article Iain Davis digs into the work or shall we say, blunders, he attributes to Ferguson. Davis writes, “both Public Health England (PHE) and the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) were satisfied that COVID-19 (C19) presented a ‘low risk’ of mortality and downgraded it (https://web.archive.org/web/20200323233816/https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid) from the status of a High Consequence Infectious Disease (HCID) on March 19th. The ACDP board (https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/advisory-committee-on-dangerous-pathogens#membership) members include Professor Neil Ferguson from Imperial College. Presumably Prof. Ferguson was among the dissenting voices on the ACDP board as he completely ignored the majority opinion of his scientific colleagues.”

There is nothing wrong in holding a dissenting scientific view, however, this specific ‘dissenting view’ and the way it was implemented by the UK and the USA governments appears to have led America, Britain and the rest of the world to respond in a way that created a catastrophe of a previously unknown scale.

“In an interview on 13th February, widely reported by the mainstream media (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8005931/British-scientist-leading-coronavirus-fight-says-forecasts-400-000-UK-deaths.html) ,” Davis writes, “he (Ferguson) stated his predictive models were ‘not absurd.’ He said that infection rates of 60% of the population with a 1% mortality rate were possible. Standing by his prediction of 400,000 C19 deaths in the UK. The Imperial College computer model report (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf) was released to the public on 16th March, predicting huge numbers of deaths from C19. By the 19th March Prof. Ferguson must have known a majority of his peers disagreed with him.”

Davis points out that Ferguson failed to implement the most basic of scientific procedures, namely allowing a peer review of his ‘predictions,’ making sure that one or more people with similar competence in epidemiology evaluate what we now know to have been the grossly exaggerated Imperial College models and predictions.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY&feature=emb_title

Davis reveals that “when it comes to wildly inaccurate predictions Prof. Ferguson’s work at Imperial College has a long and distinguished history. In 2002, he said that (up to) 50,000 people in the UK would die from ‘mad cow disease’, to date less than 200 have passed away; he predicted 200 million global deaths from the H5N1 bird flu. Currently it is a suspected factor in the deaths of 455 people (https://www.who.int/influenza/human_animal_interface/2020_01_20_tableH5N1.pdf) world wide; in 2009 he told the UK Government that 65,000 could die from swine flu in the UK and worked with the World Health Organisation (https://in-this-together.com/coronavirus-lockdown-and-what-you-are-not-being-told-part-2/) to predict millions of deaths from the H1N1 global flu pandemic*.”

You may ask what kind of scientists are mistaken in their predictions by factors of 200 or more? What kind of an academic institution would provide such a scientist with a platform, let alone having him lead a department? And the questions go far deeper. Davis writes, “while Prof. Ferguson and his Imperial College colleagues have been consistently wrong (https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/who-controls-british-government-response-covid19-part-one) they have also been unquestioningly believed by governments and intergovernmental bodies on every occasion. Seemingly without reservation. Despite the clear evidence to the contrary, policy makers from all political parties have shown tremendous loyalty to Imperial College’s silly data models. In doing so, they have not only ignored the researchers’ woeful history of failed predictions but have also denied the scientific evidence which usually contradicts them.”

Davis is not alone. On April 28th F. William Engdahl (http://www.williamengdahl.com/englishNEO28Apr2020.php) expressed very similar concerns re Neil Ferguson, his reputation and his past ‘models.’ “In 2005,” Engdahl writes, “Ferguson claimed that up to 200 million (!) people worldwide would be killed by bird-flu or H5N1. By early 2006, the WHO had only linked 78 deaths to the virus.”

I am not in any position to assess the true danger to us of C19 or our response to it. But simple common sense tells us that the only reliable scientific fact about our British leading epidemiologist team is the uncomfortable fact that it has often been wrong and by a huge margin.

In an unreserved manner Engdahl suggests that, “the same Ferguson group at Imperial College, with WHO endorsement, was behind the panic numbers that triggered a UK government lockdown. Ferguson was also the source of the wild ‘prediction’ that 2.2 million Americans would likely die if immediate lockdown of the US economy did not occur. Based on the Ferguson model, Dr Anthony Fauci of NIAID reportedly confronted President Trump and pressured him to declare a national health emergency. Much as in the UK, once the damage to the economy was begun, Ferguson’s model later drastically lowered the US fatality estimates to between 100,000 to 200,000 deaths. In both US and UK cases Neil Ferguson relied on data from the Chinese government, data which has been shown as unreliable. (https://bit.ly/3eYC3Vu)”

How would Neil Ferguson and his Imperial College group score on Popper’s falsifiability test? Not well.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/413ZzxiwCjL.jpg (https://www.amazon.com/dp/191107220X/?tag=unco037-20)
In Popperian terms, what Ferguson and his Imperial College team produce has little to do with science, as it does not even attempt to produce a clear criteria for falsification. ‘Predictions’ of ‘possible’ death that fluctuate widely from 50-200.000 (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-93991/CJD-death-toll-hit-150-000.html) in the case of Mad Cow Disease or from 20.000 -500.000 in the case of C19 cannot be considered ‘falsifiable’ scientifically as the range is too broad to validate one theoretical calculative model over another. The models at play, so it seems, include too many ‘if’ variables, possibly to cover their author’s reputation rather than to produce something that resembles a verifiable prediction.

The next question is why anyone in Britain or the USA takes such ‘science’ seriously. One wonders what is it that has led Britain and its academia to lose touch with the core scientific ethos?

As upsetting as it may be for some progressives, even Donald Trump/White House’s (https://news.yahoo.com/coronavirus-model-used-white-house-142702778.html) Corona model is more reliable and scientific than the numerical exercise produced by Britain’s most prestigious academic institute.

Yet despite the fact that Imperial College and Ferguson have apparently pulled Britain and the USA into total financial chaos and of a humongous magnitude, Imperial College is still open for business (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/). In spite of the disaster it inflicted on the world it still describes itself (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/about/) as “a global top ten university with a world-class reputation in science, engineering, business and medicine.” I believe that not many academic institutes could compete with Imperial College in inflicting global scientific disasters. To the best of my knowledge, Imperial College’s epidemiology team has yet to be questioned by law enforcement about the theoretical grounds and the evidence at the core of its phantasmic predictions.

Engdahl reports that “Neil Ferguson and his modelling group at Imperial College, in addition to being backed by WHO, receive millions from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Ferguson heads the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium at Imperial College which lists as its funders the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Gates-backed GAVI-the vaccine alliance. (https://bit.ly/2zF5s72) From 2006 through 2018 the Gates Foundation has invested an impressive $184,872,226.99** into Ferguson’s Imperial College modelling operations.”

In 2002, Arnold S. Relman (https://newrepublic.com/article/66623/americas-other-drug-problem), then a professor of medicine at Harvard University suggested that ‘’the medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country [USA] are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.’’

Maybe, judging Ferguson, Imperial College or any other ‘scientific’ institution in Popperian terms misses the point. What matters to such academic institutions is the amount they can amass from oligarchs, industries, bankers and corporations. This raises the question, what do they give in return? We are basically dealing with Western civilization prostituting its prime intellectual asset, namely its scientific ethos.

If there is a lesson to be drawn from the C19 crisis at this stage, it is that universities, academia and science must be separated from all forms of mammon and mammonites. The word ‘university’ is derived from the Latin word universitas meaning: the whole, total, the universe, the world. Universitas were initially communities of teachers and scholars committed to knowledge and its seeking rather than an extended apparatus attached to pharmaceutical conglomerates, food chains, bankers and other symptoms of the capitalist universe.

For Western civilization to survive it must reinstate its Athenian roots and its commitment to truth seeking. We should, once again learn to differentiate and understand the crude tension between science and technology, between those who unveil the concealed and those who act to appropriate nature and turn every possible occurrence, including corona virus, into a money making machine.

One great philosopher put a lot of work into the understanding of the tension between science and technology or shall we say, between truth and its instrumentalization. I am referring to Martin Heidegger, (https://simondon.ocular-witness.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/question_concerning_technology.pdf) the philosopher the Guardians of Judea (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/mar/13/martin-heidegger-black-notebooks-reveal-nazi-ideology-antisemitism) do not think you should pay any attention to.

In my next article I will examine the role of Imperial College and its C19 ‘epidemiology’ in light of the prophecy left to us by Heidegger’s legacy.

*To read another detail account of Neil Ferguson’s prediction history read The Ferguson Effect by Scott Johnson (https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/04/the-ferguson-effect.php)


** GA: though I have seen references to this sum repeatedly mentioned on different outlets, I see the need to mention that I myself didn’t see any official reference that indicates that this number is actually genuine.

[keehah]

TheGuardianUK: Neil Ferguson: 20 years' experience with pathogen outbreaks (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/may/05/neil-ferguson-20-years-experience-with-pathogen-outbreaks)

As head of the department at Imperial College London since 2012 Ferguson carries with him 20 years of experience of studying pathogen outbreaks – foot and mouth disease in 2001, Sars in 2003, swine flu in 2011, Mers in 2012, and Ebola and Zika in 2014.

He modelled the spread of all those outbreaks, advising five UK prime ministers in the process.


“when it comes to wildly inaccurate predictions Prof. Ferguson’s work at Imperial College has a long and distinguished history. In 2002, he said that (up to) 50,000 people in the UK would die from ‘mad cow disease’, to date less than 200 have passed away; he predicted 200 million global deaths from the H5N1 bird flu. Currently it is a suspected factor in the deaths of 455 people world wide; in 2009 he told the UK Government that 65,000 could die from swine flu in the UK and worked with the World Health Organisation to predict millions of deaths from the H1N1 global flu pandemic*.”

That is an incomplete list of significant failure.

vettimes.co.uk: Government’s [Foot and Mouth Disease] FMD Science Group (https://www.vettimes.co.uk/article/lessons-to-be-learned-from-foot-and-mouth-outbreaks/?format=pdf)

The Science Group was dominated by four teams of modellers. The description of it being like a modelling sub-committee was accurate, especially at the beginning. “A formally constituted scientific advisory committee would have looked very different,” said David Shannon, MAFF’s chief scientific officer3.

Paul Kitching and I were the two FMD experts from Pirbright, but for lengthy periods we were spectators to discussions between the modellers. What concerned us most was the model from Imperial College London, which drove the 24hr/48hr cull policy and dictated all FMD-susceptible species on infected premises (IP) were to be slaughtered within 24 hours of disease confirmation and all susceptible animals on premises contiguous to an IP were to be slaughtered within 48 hours.

We could accept the 24hr cull because good evidence existed from previous outbreaks (UK, 1967 to 1968; Denmark, 1982) that killing animals quickly on an IP is an effective control strategy. We were, however, vehemently opposed to the 48hr contiguous cull because its basis ignored the species composition of farms. This was a serious error since considerable differences exist between FMD-susceptible livestock in the amount of virus they excrete and the doses causing infection.

The model also assumed the virus would infect whole herds or flocks at once and be excreted maximally and indefinitely, unless the animals were killed. Clearly, this was a gross exaggeration of the predicted risk of spread4.

A mathematical modeller later remarked: “The initial [Imperial] model was formulated during the first few weeks of the epidemic and was necessarily a crude approximation5.” More importantly, it was wrong.

The 24hr/48hr cull, announced by Sir David on 23 March and implemented on 29 March, was based on a model that was crude and wrong, and led to the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of animals, created severe disposal problems, and diverted scarce veterinary resources and support staff from activities of greater priority.

Wendy Vere, a West Country veterinarian, commented in the Devon Independent Inquiry: “It was carnage by computer.” Retrospective analysis showed the Imperial model was flawed3,4.

It is noteworthy the report of The Royal Society’s inquiry, published after the outbreak, stated: “It is not satisfactory to rely on the development of models during an outbreak, or even to make other than minor modifications to existing research tools6.”

...The contiguous cull was the only method based on mathematical modelling. The aim of the 3km cull was to create “fire-breaks” in areas of high-density sheep population and prevent perceived potential spread to cattle. SOS was introduced to accelerate disease control procedures.

It is interesting to reflect on the events that took place on 21 March 2001, as the modellers who attended a meeting at the Food Standards Agency believed the outbreak was “out of control”.

That evening, Roy Anderson, of Imperial College London, stated on BBC’s Newsnight “this epidemic is not under control,” and “the infection is not going to peak for many weeks to come”.

Analysis performed after the epidemic showed the spread of infection had peaked on 16 March in Dumfries and Galloway, and nationally by 21 March4. The traditional methods were working and had brought the epidemic under control before the 24hr/48hr policy was implemented on 29 March.

[keehah]

newsrescue.com: Explosive Video of Fauci, HHS in 2019 (https://newsrescue.com/explosive-video-fauci-hhs-in-2019-plotting-disruptive-new-outbreak-in-china-somewhere-to-blow-the-system-up-and-enforce-universal-mrna-vaccination/) Plotting “Disruptive” New Outbreak in “China Somewhere” to “Blow the System Up” and Enforce Universal mRNA Vaccination (https://newsrescue.com/explosive-video-fauci-hhs-in-2019-plotting-disruptive-new-outbreak-in-china-somewhere-to-blow-the-system-up-and-enforce-universal-mrna-vaccination/)

October 6, 2021



The panelists in the clip discussed making a transition from the “egg growing” old method of making vaccines initiated in “1947”
In clip, Fauci complained of having to “prove this thing works” due to the clinical study phases in traditional proof of new therapies which he said takes a decade
They proposed an “entity of excitement” in a “disruptive way” to push the new mRNA technology to the world to cut through bureaucratic issues
Bright says “But it is not too crazy to think that an outbreak of novel avian virus could occur in China somewhere. We could get the RNA sequence from that.. to a number of regional centers if not local, if not even in your home at some point, and print those vaccines on a patch of self-administer.“


Three clips from the hour-long video of the summit from C-SPAN are extracted by Alex Jones in this shorter video to show how the COVID-19 pandemic was most evidently planned a-forehand and how Big Pharma worked with the UN and other corrupt US government officials to develop and release the COVID-19 virus to spearhead the ‘Great Reset’...

https://rumble.com/vndrmn-explosive-video-of-fauci-and-hhs-plotting-for-a-new-outbreak-to-enforce-mrn.html

Here’s the transcript:

Michael Specter: Why don’t we blow the system up? I mean obviously, we can’t just turn off the spigot on the system. We have and then say, hey everyone in the world should get this new vaccine that we haven’t given to anyone yet. But there must be some way that we grow vaccines mostly in eggs the way we did in 1947.

Fauci: In order to make the transition from getting out of the tried-and-true egg growing which we know gives us results that can be beneficial, I mean we’ve done well with that. There must be something that has to be much better. You have to prove that this works and then you’ve got to go through all of the clinical trials: phase 1, phase 2, phase 3, and then show that this particular product is going to be good over a period of years. That alone, if it works perfectly, it’s going to take a decade.

Bright: There might be a need or even an urgent call for an entity of excitement out there that’s completely disruptive, that’s not beholden to bureaucratic strings and processes.

Fauci: So we really do have a problem of how the world perceives influenza and it’s going to be very difficult to change that unless you do it from within and save.. I don’t care what your perception is, we’re going to address the problem in a disruptive and in an iterative way because she does need both.

Bright: But it is not too crazy to think that an outbreak of novel avian virus could occur in China somewhere. We could get the RNA sequence from that.. to a number of regional centers if not local, if not even in your home at some point, and print those vaccines on a patch of self-administer.

Joining Fauci, Rick Bright, and Michael Specter at this event were: Margaret Hamburg, Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Medicine, Bruce Gellin, President, Global Immunization, Sabin Vaccine Institute, Casey Wright, CEO, FluLab.

In short, this panel discussion focused on what they perceived as the need for a universal flu vaccine, but they admitted that the old way of producing vaccines was not sufficient for their purposes, and that they needed some kind of global event where many people were dying to be able to roll out a new mRNA vaccine to be tested on the public.

They all agreed that the annual flu virus was not scary enough to create an event that would convince people to get a universal vaccine. And as we now know today, about 2 years after this event, that “terrifying virus” that was introduced was the COVID-19 Sars virus.

And so now we know why the flu just “disappeared” in the 2020-21 flu season. It was simply replaced by COVID-19, in a worldwide cleverly planned “pandemic” to roll out the world’s first universal mRNA vaccines...

Michael Specter asked: “Do we need lots of people to die for that sense of urgency to occur?”

Hamburg replied that: “There are already lots of people dying” from the flu each year.

Bruce Gellin stated that basically people just are not afraid enough of the term “the flu.”

There are so many things that are revealed about how Big Pharma and government health authorities think in this panel discussion.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?465845-1/universal-flu-vaccine

October 29, 2019
Universal Flu Vaccine

Health experts discussed the scientific and technological prospects of an effective universal influenza vaccine. Speakers included Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Margaret Hamburg, former FDA commissioner. [Milkin Institute] Panelists discussed the need for more funding for research, better collaboration between the private and government sectors, advances in technology in flu research and the goal of a universal flu vaccine.

[keehah]

Ontario's scamdemicing rats are returning to the University of Toronto.

thestar.com:In an uncertain time, Steini Brown has been the Ontario science table’s model of certainty (https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2021/05/30/in-an-uncertain-time-steini-brown-has-been-the-ontario-science-tables-model-of-certainty.html)

Bruce Arthur May 30, 2021
One thing about [Adalsteinn] Steini Brown [UofT Dalla Lana School of Public Health] is you can rely on him in the hard times, and maybe especially then. When the co-chair of Ontario’s science table gives regular public briefings about COVID-19, it is a serious, honest, even dour comfort; he tells you what the science says about the pandemic as best he can, and so has almost accidentally become the most trusted public health voice in Ontario. In an uncertain time, Steini Brown has been a certainty.

“So much of the pandemic has been obscured. So much is through this veil, darkly,” says John McGrath of TVO, a regular at the briefings. “And then you have Steini Brown, and you ask a question, and he gives you as clear an answer as he’s able to, and it’s like discovering a superpower.”

The best example came Feb. 11, when the tall, bespectacled Brown presented evidence about the dangers of reopening as the province prepared to reopen. McGrath infamously asked, “am I missing something here, or is this presentation actually predicting a disaster?”

“No, I don’t think you’re missing anything,” said Brown.
cbc.ca: Top epidemiologist resigns from Ontario's COVID-19 science table, alleges withholding of 'grim' projections (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/david-fisman-resignation-covid-science-table-ontario-1.6149961)

Aug 23, 2021
One of Ontario's most vocal epidemiologists has resigned from the province's COVID-19 Science Advisory Table, alleging the group has delayed publication of its pandemic projections for the fall due to political interference — a charge the table has denied.

Dr. David Fisman, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Toronto's Dalla Lana School of Public Health, announced on Twitter on Monday morning that he would step down from the table, posting a letter of resignation he sent to table co-chair Dr. Adalsteinn Brown...

Fisman has already been removed from the table's list of members on its website.

His resignation comes two days after he tweeted that the science table had "important modelling work that projects a grim fall" and implied its publication had been intentionally delayed.

"I don't understand why they're not releasing that. It's important for people to understand what lies ahead, and what the stakes are," he wrote.
cbc.ca: Adalsteinn Brown, key voice in Ontario's COVID-19 response, leaving science table (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/adalsteinn-brown-covid-19-science-table-1.6540150)

Aug 03, 2022
University of Toronto Professor Adalsteinn Brown, who was a fixture at Ontario's Science Advisory Table news conferences through some of the most dire months of the COVID-19 pandemic, is stepping down as one of the table's co-chairs.

In a news release issued Wednesday, the table said Brown is leaving to focus on his position as dean of the Dalla Lana School of Public Health at U of T...

Brown's replacement is Dr. Upton Allen, who is a professor of pediatrics at the University of Toronto, as well as chief of the division of infectious diseases at the Hospital for Sick Children.

Brown was became known for his frank assessments of the situation in Ontario through the pandemic — like when he said the Omicron wave would "likely be the hardest wave of the pandemic" back in December of last year, and argued for restrictions that would reduce contacts.
thestar.com: Ontario’s COVID science table is being shut down. The decision further erodes trust in public health (https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2022/08/25/is-ontarios-covid-science-table-about-to-be-shut-down-it-sure-looks-that-way.html)

Bruce Arthur Columnist Aug. 25, 2022
Ontario’s independent volunteer science table, an invaluable source of information and direction throughout the pandemic, has been told it will be dissolved.

It would be an abrupt and shocking move from Public Health Ontario, which had agreed to take the table of more than 40 scientists from its previous home at the University of Toronto, and negotiated terms of reference with then-co-chair Steini Brown over the summer.

The Ministry of Health denies the table will be shut down, saying “the work of the (science advisory table) would continue,” and when pressed, “the SAT is not being shut down.”

But according to a summary circulated among the science table and obtained by the Star, new PHO head Michael Sherar [Professor of Medical Biophysics at the University of Toronto] told the table on Aug. 18 that he would shut it down Sept. 6. The science table’s peerless pandemic dashboard would be eliminated, its access to data gone, its projects stranded. In its place, PHO would establish a hand-picked 15-person advisory group with no formal scientific director, limited independence from PHO or the chief medical officer of health — no ability to unilaterally choose topics of study, for instance — and far less clinical expertise.

Public Health Ontario is directly responsible for negotiations and did not deny the table was being shut down; it merely said negotiations were ongoing to “establish a mandate that reflects a long-term, sustainable approach,” and that “membership will continue to be comprised of independent experts.”

Conversations with both PHO and table sources confirmed the contents of the letter, which painstakingly charts the past month’s negotiations.

Even if dissolution were a negotiating tactic, there does not seem to be a path here.

On Aug. 2, PHO reneged on the previously negotiated terms, and on Aug. 11 offered new parameters that strictly limited both independence and transparency. They gave the table a Sept. 6 deadline to accept the new, restrictive terms, and a week later Sherar cut to the chase.

It is understood that the removal of independence would be a deal-breaker for the table, and everything is pointing toward an end. When told of the ministry’s denial that they were being shut down, one science table member simply wrote back, “B.S.” No further negotiations are currently scheduled.

There were surely ways to take the strong contributions of this group and use them to serve the public as the pandemic evolves. This scenario, however, seems closer to arson.
cp24.com: Ontario Science table to be dissolved next month as director warns of 'really tough fall and winter' (https://www.cp24.com/news/ontario-science-table-to-be-dissolved-next-month-as-director-warns-of-really-tough-fall-and-winter-1.6043537?cache=dkorkzbx)

The move to shut down the 35-member table and create a new structure under Public Health Ontario comes less than five months after the arms-length provincial agency announced that it was assuming “operation and oversight” of it. The table had previously been hosted by the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health...

The Ontario Science Advisory Table is made up of dozens of scientists and other experts, who have volunteered their time to study numerous aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic, often providing blunt advice to the government on the need for public health measures to limit spread.

The table also had a separate modelling group, which were responsible for frequent COVID-19 projections which often provided an early warning about impending waves of the pandemic.

In a statement released earlier on Friday, [Fahad] Razak [assistant professor at the UofT Dalla Lana School of Public Health] noted that it was a “great privilege” to serve on the table since its inception and said that he hoped some of the “difficult” advice it provided ultimately “helped to reduce suffering” during “the worst public health crisis in a century.”...

“I think we are in a significantly high risk period. I hate to say it because nobody wants to hear that but if you look at where we are right now we have never seen this kind of strain in hospitals (in August), which is typically a recovery period before you go into a very tough fall and winter season,” he told CP24. “There is a very high probability that we will be facing both influenza and COVID waves this winter with a really, really constrained resource in terms of our staff and hospital capacity. I just hope we have the will despite our exhaustion to pull together and get our health system through what is probably going to be a really tough fall and winter.”

The science’s table’s advice often differed from the actions taken by the Ford government throughout the pandemic, with its former scientific director Dr. Peter Juni frequently taking to the airwaves to forcefully urge Queen’s Park to act more aggressively...

For his part, Razak expressed optimism that the principals of independence that defined the science table’s work through the first two-and-a-half years of the pandemic can be transferred to whatever new working group might be formed.
https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Dissolution-of-the-Ontario-Science-Table_20220826-1.pdf

tbof.ca: Ontario Science Table Disbanded as Politicians Begin Throwing Scientists Under the Bus (https://tbof.ca/ontario-science-table-disbanded-as-politicians-begin-throwing-scientists-under-the-bus/)

The Ontario Government has disbanded (https://twitter.com/COVIDSciOntario/status/1563162028285788161) the Ontario Science Table (“OST”) effective September 6, 2022. The OST’s advice and modelling, which was seldom made public, was regularly relied upon to justify the myriad of restrictive COVID-19 measures over the past 2.5 years. Their models were always wrong, and time and court documents continue to prove that their recommendations were never scientific or effective.

Now, as quickly as these unelected technocrats were constituted and given sweeping and unaccountable influence over Ontarians’ lives, they are being unceremoniously ushered off the stage.

A scramble is happening across the world right now, wherever the mRNA vaccines, masks, and lockdowns were recklessly pushed.

As the narrative of the vaccines’ safety & efficacy and the lockdowns’ necessity crumbles, politicians and health officials are scurrying to blame the other and attempt to avoid the public reckoning ever closer on the horizon.

This started about two weeks ago with the CDC revising (https://www.theepochtimes.com/cdc-revises-covid-19-guidelines-in-sweeping-overhaul_4658929.html) its guidelines so that there is no longer a difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, and removing various safety statements for the mRNA jabs – including that the spike protein leaves the body quickly.

Shortly thereafter, Fauci announced his resignation.

Then, in Canada, the US, and the UK a symphony of politicians suddenly started blaming health officials for the lockdowns. UK Prime Minster hopeful Rishi Sunak (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-62664537) stated today that he tried to speak out against lockdowns but that the bureaucrats, who of course have no seat at the Cabinet table, could simply not be outmaneuvered.

In a particularly ironic twist, the US House Democrats released a report (https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/24/trump-white-house-exerted-pressure-on-fda-for-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-house-report-finds-00053428) a few days ago (now two months from the congressional election) blaming Trump for rushing the vaccines in order to influence the 2020 election.

It seems that the Ontario Government recognizes the wind is turning and that, if it gets into a politicians-said / scientists-said, its best for the politicians if the scientists have no formal platform from which to coordinate an organized and formally recognized platform.

The duty of all Canadians who resisted and held the line now turns to advance and increase the pressure on the politicians, scientists, doctors, legacy media, corporations, and all other individuals that fervently supported and pushed the immoral, unethical, unconstitutional, and economy destabilizing restrictions and mandates.

As we do so, these charlatans will only squirm harder and squeal louder as they trip over themselves to push the other in front of the bus.

Ka-thunk, ka-thunk!

[keehah]

spectator.co.uk: The lockdown files: Rishi Sunak on what we weren’t told (https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-lockdown-files-rishi-sunak-on-what-we-werent-told)

27 August 2022
Those consequences are still making themselves known: exams madness, the NHS waiting list surge, thousands of unexplained ‘excess deaths’, judicial backlogs and economic chaos. Was all that expected, factored in, and thought by leaders to be a price worth paying? Right at the start of lockdown, ministers had already started to worry that the policy was being recklessly implemented without anyone thinking about the side-effects. Only a handful of key players at the very top made the decisions: among them Rishi Sunak, the chancellor. He has now decided to go public on what happened...

[W]hen Neil Ferguson and his team at Imperial College published their famous ‘Report 9’, which argued that Covid casualties could hit 500,000 if no action was taken – but the figure could be below 20,000 if Britain locked down. That, of course, turned out to be a vast exaggeration of lockdown’s ability to curb Covid deaths. Imperial stressed it did ‘not consider the wider social and economic costs of suppression, which will be high’. But surely someone involved in making the policy would figure it out.

This was the crux: no one really did. A cost-benefit calculation – a basic requirement for pretty much every public health intervention – was never made. ‘I wasn’t allowed to talk about the trade-off,’ says Sunak. Ministers were briefed by No. 10 on how to handle questions about the side-effects of lockdown. ‘The script was not to ever acknowledge them. The script was: oh, there’s no trade-off, because doing this for our health is good for the economy.’

If frank discussion was being suppressed externally, Sunak thought it all the more important that it took place internally. But that was not his experience. ‘I felt like no one talked,’ he says. ‘We didn’t talk at all about missed [doctor’s] appointments, or the backlog building in the NHS in a massive way. That was never part of it.’ When he did try to raise concerns, he met a brick wall. ‘Those meetings were literally me around that table, just fighting. It was incredibly uncomfortable every single time.’ He recalls one meeting where he raised education. ‘I was very emotional about it. I was like: “Forget about the economy. Surely we can all agree that kids not being in school is a major nightmare” or something like that. There was a big silence afterwards. It was the first time someone had said it. I was so furious.’

One of Sunak’s big concerns was about the fear messaging, which his Treasury team worried could have long-lasting effects. ‘In every brief, we tried to say: let’s stop the “fear” narrative. It was always wrong from the beginning. I constantly said it was wrong.’ The posters showing Covid patients on ventilators, he said, were the worst. ‘It was wrong to scare people like that.’ The closest he came to defying this was in a September 2020 speech saying that it was time to learn to ‘live without fear’ – a direct response to the Cabinet Office’s messaging. ‘They were very upset about that.’

Lockdown – closing schools and much of the economy while sending the police after people who sat on park benches – was the most draconian policy introduced in peacetime. No. 10 wanted to present it as ‘following the science’ rather than a political decision, and this had implications for the wiring of government decision-making. It meant elevating Sage, a sprawling group of scientific advisers, into a committee that had the power to decide whether the country would lock down or not. There was no socioeconomic equivalent to Sage; no forum where other questions would be asked.

So whoever wrote the minutes for the Sage meetings – condensing its discussions into guidance for government – would set the policy of the nation. No one, not even cabinet members, would know how these decisions were reached.

In the early days, Sunak had an advantage. ‘The Sage people didn’t realise for a very long time that there was a Treasury person on all their calls. A lovely lady. She was great because it meant that she was sitting there, listening to their discussions.’

It meant he was alerted early to the fact that these all-important minutes of Sage meetings often edited out dissenting voices. His mole, he says, would tell him: ‘“Well, actually, it turns out that lots of people disagreed with that conclusion”, or “Here are the reasons that they were not sure about it.” So at least I would be able to go into these meetings better armed.’...

‘I was like: “Summarise for me the key assumptions, on one page, with a bunch of sensitivities and rationale for each one”,’ Sunak says. ‘In the first year I could never get this.’ The Treasury, he says, would never recommend policy based on unexplained modelling: he regarded this as a matter of basic competence. But for a year, UK government policy – and the fate of millions –was being decided by half-explained graphs cooked up by outside academics.

dailymail.co.uk: Boris Johnson insists Covid lockdown decisions were 'right', rebutting nemesis Rishi Sunak's claim that draconian actions 'screwed' Britain (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11149231/Boris-Johnson-insists-Covid-lockdown-decisions-right.html)
26 August 2022

[keehah]

drdrew.com: Dr. Paul Alexander: Why CDC Pushed Lockdowns vs. Herd Immunity with Dr. Kelly Victory – Ask Dr. Drew (https://drdrew.com/2022/epidemiologist-dr-paul-e-alexander-on-herd-immunity-vs-lockdowns-with-dr-kelly-victory-ask-dr-drew/)
September 7, 2022
Video (youtube) (https://youtu.be/dmq9mt_zFI4)

Doctor Alexander from interview:
"So I asked him [CDC Director] I said "So Doctor Redfield, can I get an example of the science and the studies the CDC used to make that social distancing at six feet... ”He said there is no Science, We Made it Up”

I asked CDC Director about the Science used to make 6 Feet Distancing Rule, He said "We Made it Up”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZarTNRjIyE
2:12

The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis wrote a report a few months back bitching and whining about Dr Alexander's rational science and common sense that in the few months since the report was written even the CDC now has backtracked and now recommends some of:

coronavirus.house.gov: THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S EMBRACE OF A DANGEROUS AND DISCREDITED HERD IMMUNITY VIA MASS INFECTION STRATEGY (https://coronavirus.house.gov/sites/democrats.coronavirus.house.gov/files/2022.06.21%20The%20Trump%20Administration%E2%80%99 s%20Embrace%20of%20a%20Dangerous%20and%20Discredit ed%20Herd%20Immunity%20via%20Mass%20Infection%20St rategy.pdf) [pdf]

And WaPo wrote up 'public servant' scamdemicers in conflict Dr. Alexander on this topic July 2020:

WaPo: CDC feels pressure from Trump as rift grows over coronavirus response (https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/trump-sidelines-public-health-advisers-in-growing-rift-over-coronavirus-response/2020/07/09/ad803218-c12a-11ea-9fdd-b7ac6b051dc8_story.html)

July 9, 2020
The adviser, Paul Alexander, criticized the agency’s methods and said its warning to pregnant women “reads in a way to frighten women . . . as if the President and his administration can’t fix this and it is getting worse.”...

The latest clash between the White House and its top public health advisers erupted Wednesday, when the president slammed the agency’s recommendation that schools planning to reopen should keep students’ desks six feet apart, among other steps to reduce infection risks. In a tweet, Trump — who has demanded schools at all levels hold in-person classes this fall — called the advice “very tough & expensive.”

“While they want them open, they are asking schools to do very impractical things. I will be meeting with them!!!” Trump tweeted

wikipedia: Paul E. Alexander
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_E._Alexander)
Paul Elias Alexander is a Canadian health researcher and a former Trump administration official at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Alexander was recruited from his part-time, unpaid position at McMaster University to serve as an aide to HHS assistant secretary for public affairs Michael Caputo in March 2020. In that role, Alexander pressured federal scientists and public health agencies to suppress and edit their COVID-19 analyses to make them consistent with Trump's rhetoric.

Within the Trump Administration, Alexander advocated for a strategy of mass infection of the public with COVID-19 to build herd immunity. He sought to muzzle federal scientists and public health agencies to prevent them from contradicting the Trump Administration's political talking points.

wikipedia: Robert R. Redfield (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_R._Redfield)

Redfield became the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on March 26, 2018. He was appointed to the post by President Donald Trump, after the president's first appointee, Brenda Fitzgerald, resigned in scandal... In his inaugural address to the CDC, Redfield called the agency "science-based and data-driven, and that's why CDC has the credibility around the world that it has".

[Neuro]

Or herd immunity, if that is even possible with this man-made virus.

Would you trust the same bunch of assholes who got us into this mess to provide a safe vaccine??

Great insights very early on in the beginning of plandemic!

Funny thing was 18th of March 2020 when you wrote this I had my first bout of Corona followed by 2-3 more since then (2 this year!). And the vax seems to turn out to be a greater killer than the manmade virus. It is one of the main points I use when discussing vaxx with people I consider somewhat reasonable. That I wouldn’t accept getting ”the cure” from the same people that created the problem, as they don’t seem to have good intentions towards humanity…