Mike yeadon watch

Ah the Great Barrington Declaration again, from the American Institute of Economic Research, those well known medical professionals. Have they given any explanation yet of how the herd immunity approach would work or an analysis of the human cost of their approach? Have they offered any kind of idea how targeted isolation is actually possible without rampant disease in the community? It was never anything more than headline seeking crap without any detail.

The initial signatories include the Dr (of literature) Naomi Watts, now a senior fellow at AIER who claims to be aware of Apple having technology to deliver vaccines via nanoparticles that allow time travel.
And Jonas Ludvigsson who's accused of deliberately leaving out data to support his belief.

Science | AAAS

www.sciencemag.org www.sciencemag.org
 
Last edited:


rudd said:
Ah the Great Barrington Declaration again, from the American Institute of Economic Research, those well known medical professionals. Have they given any explanation yet of how the herd immunity approach would work or an analysis of the human cost of their approach? Have they offered any kind of idea how targeted isolation is actually possible without rampant disease in the community? It was never anything more than headline seeking crap without any detail.

The initial signatories include the Dr (of literature) Naomi Watts, now a senior fellow at AIER who claims to be aware of Apple having technology to deliver vaccines via nanoparticles that allow time travel.
And Jonas Ludvigsson who's accused of deliberately leaving out data to support his belief.

Science | AAAS

www.sciencemag.org www.sciencemag.org
Click to expand...

Care to discuss real issues surrounding the great Barrington Declaration or just want to snipe from sidelines like a kerrrnt?
 
Charlie Chimp said:
Care to discuss real issues surrounding the great Barrington Declaration or just want to snipe from sidelines like a kerrrnt?
Click to expand...
Happy to. Not sure what you think the real issues are as I've already raised concerns which you've dismissed with an insult and no constructive retort, like a conspiracy theorist.

So I'll give you my feelings about it.

1. It was big on ideas, but offers no thinking of how it will be achieved.
2. It's from an economic think tank that doesn't appear to give any breakdown on the impact on health. Which would suggest to me that it hasn't been thought out and is actually more fitting of a lobbying group only concerned about money.
3. The signatories included many Doctors who no experience of public health, virology or medicine and instead had Phds in literature, homeopathy and Mongolian Khoomi singing.
4. The underlying herd immunity premise was based on early papers from a signatory, Dr Gupta who's preprint papers in which she claimed places were reaching herd immunity in April haven't been picked up by any journal as far as I'm aware, had pulled many in because it offered an alternative that people wanted to be true, like the denial stage in a grief/loss reaction. The papers hadn't been picked up because when you actually look at the science behind them, they're deeply flawed.
5. Keeping schools open is something I've been a big advocate of for the majority of the time, but the evidence from another initial signatory, Ludvigsson has huge concerns because he's left out data that didn't suit his narrative and is deliberately misleading.
6. Any scientist or medic with an ounce of conviction and professionalism would welcome debate to prove their point but the advocates of the declaration but what we've seen is debate about it is blocked by the advocates so the concerns aren't addressed. That would suggest to me that those pushing it don't actually believe it and are using it for monetary gain, like Bhakdi's book and Yeadon and Sikora's public appearances.
7. I've no problem with people initially believing it as a viable alternative because when it came out, along with some of the papers from Gupta et al, it offered a comforting alternative to the shitstorm that was actually happening. But seeing it's biggest advocates like Yeadon, Sikora, Bhakdi have all gone back to delete previous claims which time have shown to be bullshit and people still taking their word as true is worrying. Going back to the grief reaction analogy, it's been over a year and you'd qualify for grief therapy from the NHS now and I'd suggest anyone still falling for it could have an underlying mental health problem that needs addressing.

I've plenty other concerns but the second half of Liverpool Fulham is kicking off so I'll leave that for you.
 
Last edited:
rudd said:
Happy to. Not sure what you think the real issues are as I've already raised concerns which you've dismissed with an insult and no constructive retort, like a conspiracy theorist.

So I'll give you my feelings about it.

1. It was big on ideas, but offers no thinking of how it will be achieved.
2. It's from an economic think tank that doesn't appear to give any breakdown on the impact on health. Which would suggest to me that it hasn't been thought out and is actually more fitting of a lobbying group only concerned about money.
3. The signatories included many Doctors who no experience of public health, virology or medicine and instead had Phds in literature, homeopathy and Mongolian Khoomi singing.
4. The underlying herd immunity premise was based on early papers from a signatory, Dr Gupta who's preprint papers in which she claimed places were reaching herd immunity in April haven't been picked up by any journal as far as I'm aware, had pulled many in because it offered an alternative that people wanted to be true, like the denial stage in a grief/loss reaction. The papers hadn't been picked up because when you actually look at the science behind them, they're deeply flawed.
5. Keeping schools open is something I've been a big advocate of for the majority of the time, but the evidence from another initial signatory, Ludvigsson has huge concerns because he's left out data that didn't suit his narrative and is deliberately misleading.
6. Any scientist or medic with an ounce of conviction and professionalism would welcome debate to prove their point but the advocates of the declaration but what we've seen is debate about it is blocked by the advocates so the concerns aren't addressed. That would suggest to me that those pushing it don't actually believe it and are using it for monetary gain, like Bhakdi's book and Yeadon and Sikora's public appearances.
7. I've no problem with people initially believing it as a viable alternative because when it came out, along with some of the papers from Gupta et al, it offered a comforting alternative to the shitstorm that was actually happening. But seeing it's biggest advocates like Yeadon, Sikora, Bhakdi have all gone back to delete previous claims which time have shown to be bullshit and people still taking their word as true is worrying. Going back to the grief reaction analogy, it's been over a year and you'd qualify for grief therapy from the NHS now and I'd suggest anyone still falling for it could have an underlying mental health problem that needs addressing.

I've plenty other concerns but the second half of Liverpool Fulham is kicking off so I'll leave that for you.
Click to expand...
Great post 👏

BTW, any tips on emerging Mongolian Khoomi singing stars? I feel like I need to add some new tunes in Spotify. Ta.
 
Ciro_DiMarzio said:
Having a canny meltdown here.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1411596825103155201
Click to expand...

Frijj said:
He said there was absolutely no need for a vaccine. Hmm.
Click to expand...
Sharing his science, which has been so far wide of the mark and full out outright lies.
He's also said that Covid wasn't virulent, that is was a common garden virus.
He said it was unlikely deaths would reach 40,000
Then he said deaths would fizzle out when they were at 45,000.
He also said that it was biologically and mathematically implausible a second wave would happen.
Top science Mike.

It's all very strange because prior to all the batshit crazy stuff he came out with he was advocating slowing the spread of the virus until a vaccine came out.

My completely unvalidated theory is that once he found out Pfizer were involved he became unwell/bitter because he lost his job there in 2011 when they shut his department and he's missed his moment of fame so he's tried to get famous by being contrary and making public appearances this way instead.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top