Controversial Covid post

Economy - business will go the wall, people will lose their jobs
Health - people will suffer from not been able to get the same level of care prior to lockdown, peoples mental health will be effected

if you don’t lockdown the health one becomes worse as you have to close more of the nhs, but you also effect the mental health of nhs workers if you overwhelm them

Rather blasé and also you're forgetting losing civil liberties, freedom of assembly and all the other human rights gubbins. 😉
 
But if cases are coming down... Which it looks like they are... Then whatever impact lockdown has isn't worth it. Remember the price of lockdown are devastating.
In fact could you list the impacts of lockdown for me? Just so I know what you think they are.

Dont count cases coming down until that case graph points down, for a week (so it’s reliable). We got a week of panic buying to get through yet too 😫.

Loads of the worst places have been in tier 2 or 3 for a couple of weeks, they were already partially locked down and that’s probably slowed the increase, it certainly won’t have made it worse. Healthcare admissions are up, hospital occupancy is still going up.

The hospitals need the numbers down, and down quickly, which is even more important the colder it gets.

Didn’t they say the R was between 1.2 and 1.4? We need that below 1, and full lockdown is the fastest way to do that.
 
So......Yeadon then.
He said that we’d be able to tell if he was wrong IF the cases increase significantly in London and the South East. He said this wouldn’t happen because they’ve already been thumped and the virus has done its thing there, been and gone.
Well, the evidence is there now.

I found his thoughts on the progression of the virus very interesting and I hoped he was correct in that sense, as it meant less deaths and a sooner end to the pandemic than feared.

However, he’s been proven wrong by the markers that he himself said would prove if he was right or wrong. So no need to listen to him any longer as far as I am concerned. A conclusion I came to some time ago, but it’s only right that I draw attention to his being wrong, given I highlighted him on here in the first place.

Further evidence that he’s banging the wrong drum or has got some sort of agenda is that he’s also still pushing the PCR test false positive test issue (which may actually still be an issue) but he seems to say very little about the lateral flow test false negative issue, which is proven and far more of a dangerous issue. Why isn’t he banging that drum instead, given it’s got far more serious consequences?
Very vocal on the vaccines too, and not in a positive way.

So, it seems he needs to be placed in the same drawer as the Ivor Cummins and Sunita Guptas unfortunately.
I thought he had something worthwhile to add to the discussion but he’s been proven wrong so yeah, apologies to one and all for raising his thoughts for discussion.
 
So......Yeadon then.
He said that we’d be able to tell if he was wrong IF the cases increase significantly in London and the South East. He said this wouldn’t happen because they’ve already been thumped and the virus has done its thing there, been and gone.
Well, the evidence is there now.

I found his thoughts on the progression of the virus very interesting and I hoped he was correct in that sense, as it meant less deaths and a sooner end to the pandemic than feared.

However, he’s been proven wrong by the markers that he himself said would prove if he was right or wrong. So no need to listen to him any longer as far as I am concerned. A conclusion I came to some time ago, but it’s only right that I draw attention to his being wrong, given I highlighted him on here in the first place.

Further evidence that he’s banging the wrong drum or has got some sort of agenda is that he’s also still pushing the PCR test false positive test issue (which may actually still be an issue) but he seems to say very little about the lateral flow test false negative issue, which is proven and far more of a dangerous issue. Why isn’t he banging that drum instead, given it’s got far more serious consequences?
Very vocal on the vaccines too, and not in a positive way.

So, it seems he needs to be placed in the same drawer as the Ivor Cummins and Sunita Guptas unfortunately.
I thought he had something worthwhile to add to the discussion but he’s been proven wrong so yeah, apologies to one and all for raising his thoughts for discussion.

Ivor Cummins, former Head or Research at HP printers, diet salesman and serial grifter who now believes he's an epidemiologist or virologist said Sweden had reached herd immunity whilst others said it was nonsense. Again we see who really understands what is going on and who is out for self promotion to make money.
 
So......Yeadon then.
He said that we’d be able to tell if he was wrong IF the cases increase significantly in London and the South East. He said this wouldn’t happen because they’ve already been thumped and the virus has done its thing there, been and gone.
Well, the evidence is there now.

I found his thoughts on the progression of the virus very interesting and I hoped he was correct in that sense, as it meant less deaths and a sooner end to the pandemic than feared.

However, he’s been proven wrong by the markers that he himself said would prove if he was right or wrong. So no need to listen to him any longer as far as I am concerned. A conclusion I came to some time ago, but it’s only right that I draw attention to his being wrong, given I highlighted him on here in the first place.

Further evidence that he’s banging the wrong drum or has got some sort of agenda is that he’s also still pushing the PCR test false positive test issue (which may actually still be an issue) but he seems to say very little about the lateral flow test false negative issue, which is proven and far more of a dangerous issue. Why isn’t he banging that drum instead, given it’s got far more serious consequences?
Very vocal on the vaccines too, and not in a positive way.

So, it seems he needs to be placed in the same drawer as the Ivor Cummins and Sunita Guptas unfortunately.
I thought he had something worthwhile to add to the discussion but he’s been proven wrong so yeah, apologies to one and all for raising his thoughts for discussion.
You know what it takes a big man in this day and age and do that. Most people entrench their view. Big kudos for that. I don’t think you need to apologise for raising debate. Debate is healthy
 
So......Yeadon then.
He said that we’d be able to tell if he was wrong IF the cases increase significantly in London and the South East. He said this wouldn’t happen because they’ve already been thumped and the virus has done its thing there, been and gone.
Well, the evidence is there now.

I found his thoughts on the progression of the virus very interesting and I hoped he was correct in that sense, as it meant less deaths and a sooner end to the pandemic than feared.

However, he’s been proven wrong by the markers that he himself said would prove if he was right or wrong. So no need to listen to him any longer as far as I am concerned. A conclusion I came to some time ago, but it’s only right that I draw attention to his being wrong, given I highlighted him on here in the first place.

Further evidence that he’s banging the wrong drum or has got some sort of agenda is that he’s also still pushing the PCR test false positive test issue (which may actually still be an issue) but he seems to say very little about the lateral flow test false negative issue, which is proven and far more of a dangerous issue. Why isn’t he banging that drum instead, given it’s got far more serious consequences?
Very vocal on the vaccines too, and not in a positive way.

So, it seems he needs to be placed in the same drawer as the Ivor Cummins and Sunita Guptas unfortunately.
I thought he had something worthwhile to add to the discussion but he’s been proven wrong so yeah, apologies to one and all for raising his thoughts for discussion.

Yeadon has gone somewhat nuts on the vaccine but still raises some very valid points on other issues. False postitive PCRs and false negative lateral flow are issues still, especially now mass testing it to be carried in schools in certain areas. At least it seems SAGE have abandoned any lunatic plan to test the whole country.

Cummins is obviously OTT and stirs the pot but does make valid scientific points too.

If you want to have a look at a virologist who is balanced, but now seemingly increasingly becoming concerned about rights and freedoms check out Prof Balloux: Prof Francois Balloux (@BallouxFrancois) / Twitter
 
Cummins doesn’t really understand the data, he just wants to raise his profile for Patreon subscriptions. There are s few on twitter who debunk all of his nonsense.

PCR false positives aren’t an issue. There are examples all around the world that show how good they are at detecting the virus. AUS had 600000 tests and had 220 positives, they were tested again and 1 of those tested negative.
Specifity of 99.9994%. WHO are trying to get an agreed baseline for cycles for all labs to abide by to reduce any difference between countries testing policies.

when I had the Virus I tested pos 12 times in a row, tested every 48 hours. Took me 16 attempts to get 2 negatives in a row. Now if the first one of them were negative I could have infected hundreds at work and on a flight I was scheduled to be on, plus a theatre full of people. If they were false positives I infect nobody and would test negative when tested again no doubt.

Cases help track the virus and model it to learn from it for future reference.
 
I don't have time to post much atm so just going to drop in now and again. I did say I would post above excess deaths in November, I'm a little late.

1608405380153.png
The above is deaths for England (from the ONS). Yes, it is up to the 4th, I will post again with the latest update when it comes out. As I always say, best to look at a number of metrics and the wider context. I do also chat with medic friends to see what things are like on the frontline.

Deaths are, sadly, an important metric. We are not in the position we were in the spring. That was the epidemic, the virus is now endemic. In the last 5 years a peak of ~15,000 weekly deaths has been seen (see early Jan in above image). We reach that, we may not. If it comes under then I'm sure the reason will be "lockdowns". Some of the hysteria around currently is, to me, absolutely bonkers.
 
I don't have time to post much atm so just going to drop in now and again. I did say I would post above excess deaths in November, I'm a little late.

View attachment 10664
The above is deaths for England (from the ONS). Yes, it is up to the 4th, I will post again with the latest update when it comes out. As I always say, best to look at a number of metrics and the wider context. I do also chat with medic friends to see what things are like on the frontline.

Deaths are, sadly, an important metric. We are not in the position we were in the spring. That was the epidemic, the virus is now endemic. In the last 5 years a peak of ~15,000 weekly deaths has been seen (see early Jan in above image). We reach that, we may not. If it comes under then I'm sure the reason will be "lockdowns". Some of the hysteria around currently is, to me, absolutely bonkers.
196 Covid-19 patients in North Tees and Hartlepool Trust today.
 
Last edited:
So......Yeadon then.
He said that we’d be able to tell if he was wrong IF the cases increase significantly in London and the South East. He said this wouldn’t happen because they’ve already been thumped and the virus has done its thing there, been and gone.
Well, the evidence is there now.

I found his thoughts on the progression of the virus very interesting and I hoped he was correct in that sense, as it meant less deaths and a sooner end to the pandemic than feared.

However, he’s been proven wrong by the markers that he himself said would prove if he was right or wrong. So no need to listen to him any longer as far as I am concerned. A conclusion I came to some time ago, but it’s only right that I draw attention to his being wrong, given I highlighted him on here in the first place.

Further evidence that he’s banging the wrong drum or has got some sort of agenda is that he’s also still pushing the PCR test false positive test issue (which may actually still be an issue) but he seems to say very little about the lateral flow test false negative issue, which is proven and far more of a dangerous issue. Why isn’t he banging that drum instead, given it’s got far more serious consequences?
Very vocal on the vaccines too, and not in a positive way.

So, it seems he needs to be placed in the same drawer as the Ivor Cummins and Sunita Guptas unfortunately.
I thought he had something worthwhile to add to the discussion but he’s been proven wrong so yeah, apologies to one and all for raising his thoughts for discussion.

Well it was nice having you think openly for a while, must be nice not having to do that anymore back to the BBC with you. 😉
 
Cummins doesn’t really understand the data, he just wants to raise his profile for Patreon subscriptions. There are s few on twitter who debunk all of his nonsense.

PCR false positives aren’t an issue. There are examples all around the world that show how good they are at detecting the virus. AUS had 600000 tests and had 220 positives, they were tested again and 1 of those tested negative.
Specifity of 99.9994%. WHO are trying to get an agreed baseline for cycles for all labs to abide by to reduce any difference between countries testing policies.

when I had the Virus I tested pos 12 times in a row, tested every 48 hours. Took me 16 attempts to get 2 negatives in a row. Now if the first one of them were negative I could have infected hundreds at work and on a flight I was scheduled to be on, plus a theatre full of people. If they were false positives I infect nobody and would test negative when tested again no doubt.

Cases help track the virus and model it to learn from it for future reference.

He at least understands seasonality which some public health lecturers who get plenty of media exposure seemingly do not.

I have heard about AUS testing being good in the sense of few false positives. I have seen the WHO documents regarding an agreed baseline for cycles for all labs. This has been part of the problem, they have been all over the shop in different labs/settings. Just because one country is doing it well doesn't mean they all are sadly.

I'm sure you're aware that a positive PCR test does not necessarily mean an infectious person, you can test positive beyond the infectious period. You tested positive for 24 days! Is that right? That is a long time. The infectious period is (there may be the odd exception) is a lot shorter than that. Yes, a false negative early on could mean you going about and infecting other people. Quarentining post infectious people is also an issue for knock on reasons and it impractical to test the whole population and when at low prevalence it is very wasteful in terms of resources and money spent. At least SAGE have realised that.

If you were asymptomatic then it is much less likely that you would have transmitted (there has been much bandied around about asymptomatic spread). If you were symptomatic, however mild, then isolate. It should have been incentivised in the UK but wasn't really. Simple practical steps and the classic respiratory pandemic response.

We have never tested for a respiratory virus on this scale before and it has, imo, caused havoc and panic instead of being used effectively for surveillance and clinical need. Cases do indeed help track the virus. The modeling has been, again imo, shambolic. Some of that is the nature of the inputs which was understandable in spring, less so now. Did you watch the "lockdown 1.0" documentary? If not I'd suggest watching it. At least Dr Hall was open and honest about the errors, shame the same can't be said for some of the other modelers. Modeling has a lot to answer for.

Maybe someone will cite South Korea for excellent testing and track and trace. Maybe. But how do you explain other south east asian countries such as Thailand and Cambodia being relatively unaffected? Do you think Cambodia has an excellent track and system? (not aimed at you Jonny, just the board in general).
 
196 Covid-19 patients in North Tees and Hartlepool Trust today.

As I always say, best to look at a number of metrics and the wider context. I do also chat with medic friends to see what things are like on the frontline.
 
And for those who seem to want to paint me as some sort of covid denier (I am far from it, I just don't agree with the approach taken in response to it) here is a link to a discussion (from an immunologist) regarding the new strain and contains likes to the Crotty group (discussions are pre- and post-infection immunity)

Deepta Bhattacharya on Twitter: "Those who follow me know that alarmism isn't my style. But the new UK variant does have me a bit concerned. I'm not qualified to critically assess changes in transmissibility, but deletions of H69/V70 do seem to partially evade Abs. So it's worth a primer on how the immune system" / Twitter
 
And, while things can change, it is worth noting information provided by Chris Whitty in late April during a Gresham (after day of peak deaths in spring). The lecture in full can be found at: COVID-19 with Chris Whitty - YouTube A very calm and detailed lecture which included this slide.
1608416038378.png

Chris Whitty has gone from calm and reassured (after the brunt of the epidemic passed through in Spring) to trembling that tier 3 might not be enough for Manchester (even though cases began falling before tier 3 like other cities) and then tonight saying, as part of a response to a question from the public.....

"It is a very dangerous virus for many people"

Slight difference in tone?
 
You know what it takes a big man in this day and age and do that. Most people entrench their view. Big kudos for that. I don’t think you need to apologise for raising debate. Debate is healthy

The thing that really interested me was the way he believed the pandemic would play out, and for a while it was following his prediction fairly well. However, he himself said London would be the marker of whether he’s correct and that’s most definitely now not playing out as he predicted.

I do think there is still potentially an issue with pcr false positives but it’s nowhere near as significant as he makes out, or as significant as the issues with lateral flow test false negatives, and that’s a far more serious problem. So I can’t understand why he’s not all over that, if he’s really all about the injustice and errors of testing etc.
Plus his thinly veiled scepticism about the vaccines rings some alarm bells.
He’s also retweeted some very questionable stuff that is most definitely manipulating figures to portray things incorrectly.

I still look at what he has to say, but I don’t take him seriously now as the main point of interest for me was his prediction of the course of the pandemic over the coming months.

I try to listen to all sides of the argument but as time goes on and things play out, it’s getting easier to ascertain who is credible and who is perhaps just opportunistically jumping on something for whatever reason (ie Ivor Cummins)
 
Back
Top