Controversial Covid post

MolteniArcore said:
Finny, just look what you are saying. Basically some guy on Youtube says it and says that SAGE know it. No peer reviewed evidence, and there would be if he learned this in Year 1 at Uni.

There is a reason this guy isn't getting the airtime, he's a wacko. They have them in every pandemic according to a video I saw:

View attachment 7885
Click to expand...

Which is why I asked if you, or anyone else, could help here?
Simply saying he’s wacko doesn’t really do it for me
I would genuinely like to know
 
MolteniArcore said:
"He knows some stuff"

Bear & Statto have provided you with enough to show that this guy is talking out of his Harris. But like I said earlier, it's like leave and remain, it doesn't matter what's said, people have made their minds up and they aren't for changing.
Click to expand...

Small point
My mind isn’t made up
That’s why I participate in these kinds of discussions.
 
The false positive claim is only part of what Yeadon is saying and isn’t really the focus of my point.

Can anybody who has actually listened to the podcast disagree with what he says, about the course of the pandemic? As I say, I listened to it sceptically but the current evidence would suggest things are actually panning out as he and the likes of Heneghan suggest.

He doesn’t say it’s not a deadly virus, just that it’s not as deadly as originally thought. Which is a fact.
He doesn’t say there will be no more outbreaks, just that they can be expected to be more local and less severe than the initial spike, and in areas that weren’t as badly affected in the initial phase. Which is what we are seeing. He says they will be self limiting and there is some hint that that would appear to possibly happening, as the numbers slow down in some of the recent major hotspots. Fingers crossed
He says that there will sadly be more deaths, but they won’t be on the same scale as the initial phase.
Importantly, he says that if he is correct we should be able to tell relatively easily and relatively soon, as London shouldn’t have a large surge as a lot of people have been exposed there previously. Note, this isn’t saying there will be no increase, just that it will be nowhere near the scale.
He says the pandemic followed the classic gompertz curve in most places, which appears to be the case.
Most importantly for me, he says that the stated exposure of 6, 7, 8 % is based solely on anti-body tests and is completely incorrect and furthermore, Sage know this and persist in pushing that figure despite it being pretty basic biological science that T-cell immunity will play a very large part and anti-body studies are very restricted and niche in what they show. @T_A_D has tried raising this many times, and I’ve also posted stuff about t-cell immune response and the need for a test for months now. This isn’t high science, it’s pretty basic stuff that you don’t need to be a scientist to have a basic understanding of. So why won’t Sage acknowledge this fairly basic principle? That is where the conspiracy stuff starts to get dragged in. But he’s right, why do they want to persist in insisting exposure levels are so low, and completely ignoring the role of T-cells in all of this?

Anyway, I find a lot of what he says in that podcast makes sense and tallies with a lot of studies that have been released over the last few months and indeed, what we are seeing now.
He’s put himself out there to be torn down and he has given a way in which we can see if he is correct - no large surge in London.

People are getting fixated on the false positive argument which actually can’t be proven one way or the other.
It could, however, be completely nipped in the bud so easily if the government just disclose the false positive figure. Why won’t they?

Yeadon is most definitely not a covid denier, if you take that from his podcast then you aren’t really listening.
There is a lot that simply doesn’t add up.

Separately, regarding the IFR, it is widely accepted it is not 1 % and is in fact much lower than that on average. Unfortunately it is significantly higher than that for some elderly age groups but for the majority, and on average for a population, it is far less.
This video analysing a couple of studies is very interesting and presents a range of values for different countries - it is well worth a watch -


Thanks for the responses so far.
I really didn’t want this to go down the route of an argument about conspiracy theories and to get fixated on the false positive argument.
I certainly didn’t intend for it to become a covid denier type thread, which is absolutely not what I was getting at. I do think a discussion about the figures at the moment and current trajectories etc needs to be had and also what the likely course of the pandemic going forward might be. I think Yeadon has some very interesting things to say on this and it should actually be fairly easy to see whether he is right or not, in the coming weeks.
And I have absolute complete respect and gratitude for the likes of @Ravshoutsatbeck and the work all NHS staff are doing and I certainly don’t want to draw their reports into question as I absolutely believe front line accounts from NHS staff ahead of any commentator, podcast person, politician.
I would point out that generally, what ravshoutsatbeck says tallies with what Yeadon said, in regards to outbreaks in the north and further away from London, the initial epicentre in the U.K.
 
FabioPorkpie said:
The false positive claim is only part of what Yeadon is saying and isn’t really the focus of my point.

Can anybody who has actually listened to the podcast disagree with what he says, about the course of the pandemic? As I say, I listened to it sceptically but the current evidence would suggest things are actually panning out as he and the likes of Heneghan suggest.

He doesn’t say it’s not a deadly virus, just that it’s not as deadly as originally thought. Which is a fact.
He doesn’t say there will be no more outbreaks, just that they can be expected to be more local and less severe than the initial spike, and in areas that weren’t as badly affected in the initial phase. Which is what we are seeing. He says they will be self limiting and there is some hint that that would appear to possibly happening, as the numbers slow down in some of the recent major hotspots. Fingers crossed
He says that there will sadly be more deaths, but they won’t be on the same scale as the initial phase.
Importantly, he says that if he is correct we should be able to tell relatively easily and relatively soon, as London shouldn’t have a large surge as a lot of people have been exposed there previously. Note, this isn’t saying there will be no increase, just that it will be nowhere near the scale.
He says the pandemic followed the classic gompertz curve in most places, which appears to be the case.
Most importantly for me, he says that the stated exposure of 6, 7, 8 % is based solely on anti-body tests and is completely incorrect and furthermore, Sage know this and persist in pushing that figure despite it being pretty basic biological science that T-cell immunity will play a very large part and anti-body studies are very restricted and niche in what they show. @T_A_D has tried raising this many times, and I’ve also posted stuff about t-cell immune response and the need for a test for months now. This isn’t high science, it’s pretty basic stuff that you don’t need to be a scientist to have a basic understanding of. So why won’t Sage acknowledge this fairly basic principle? That is where the conspiracy stuff starts to get dragged in. But he’s right, why do they want to persist in insisting exposure levels are so low, and completely ignoring the role of T-cells in all of this?

Anyway, I find a lot of what he says in that podcast makes sense and tallies with a lot of studies that have been released over the last few months and indeed, what we are seeing now.
He’s put himself out there to be torn down and he has given a way in which we can see if he is correct - no large surge in London.

People are getting fixated on the false positive argument which actually can’t be proven one way or the other.
It could, however, be completely nipped in the bud so easily if the government just disclose the false positive figure. Why won’t they?

Yeadon is most definitely not a covid denier, if you take that from his podcast then you aren’t really listening.
There is a lot that simply doesn’t add up.

Separately, regarding the IFR, it is widely accepted it is not 1 % and is in fact much lower than that on average. Unfortunately it is significantly higher than that for some elderly age groups but for the majority, and on average for a population, it is far less.
This video analysing a couple of studies is very interesting and presents a range of values for different countries - it is well worth a watch -


Thanks for the responses so far.
I really didn’t want this to go down the route of an argument about conspiracy theories and to get fixated on the false positive argument.
I certainly didn’t intend for it to become a covid denier type thread, which is absolutely not what I was getting at. I do think a discussion about the figures at the moment and current trajectories etc needs to be had and also what the likely course of the pandemic going forward might be. I think Yeadon has some very interesting things to say on this and it should actually be fairly easy to see whether he is right or not, in the coming weeks.
And I have absolute complete respect and gratitude for the likes of @Ravshoutsatbeck and the work all NHS staff are doing and I certainly don’t want to draw their reports into question as I absolutely believe front line accounts from NHS staff ahead of any commentator, podcast person, politician.
I would point out that generally, what ravshoutsatbeck says tallies with what Yeadon said, in regards to outbreaks in the north and further away from London, the initial epicentre in the U.K.
Click to expand...

The outbreak took off in London and then later moved north. They reopened the country at the same time, therefore it figures that virus levels may have been higher in the north than the south at the end of lockdown and the reasons we now see it taking off in the North West.

That isn't a stretch that needs a whole video and graphs explaining it, it's just logical no? And it doesn't mean that some guy who claims the pandemic is over is right.

If you want to see if the pandemic is over just turn on the news. Unless the worlds media is lying and wrong, and Youtube/Podcast guy is the only one who is right? It falls down at every level.
 
MolteniArcore said:
The outbreak took off in London and then later moved north. They reopened the country at the same time, therefore it figures that virus levels may have been higher in the north than the south at the end of lockdown and the reasons we now see it taking off in the North West.

That isn't a stretch that needs a whole video and graphs explaining it, it's just logical no? And it doesn't mean that some guy who claims the pandemic is over is right.

If you want to see if the pandemic is over just turn on the news. Unless the worlds media is lying and wrong, and Youtube/Podcast guy is the only one who is right? It falls down at every level.
Click to expand...

Have you listened to the podcast?
 
GazC_MFC said:
https://www.nomoresurgeons.com/
Click to expand...
His (a guy who works at James Cook) latest comment is:
Hi Fortunately we’re nowhere near what happened in April yet. It’s difficult to know how fast patient numbers will rise as we are in uncharted territory. However, what’s clear is that unless cases start to fall we will continue to admit more and more patients. I think it’s a question of just waiting and seeing what the next few weeks bring. Cheers, Richard

I would suggest that isn't evidence to the contrary of Dr Yeadon.

As @1finny said - One certainty is - we will know in a week or 2 if Yeadon et al are right. If they are not we can all move on.
 
Alvez_48 said:
Beautifully put @FabioPorkpie the crazy thing is, I don't think there is any covid denial on this thread just a weird propensity for 'new users' to ascert that there is and then to derail the topic to push that rather than debating the topic.
Click to expand...
Not strictly, or really, part of this thread but were we all aware that SAGE is made up of 100 "advisers" and they advise on the current viral outbreak. Only 3 members of SAGE are virologists.
 
Statto1 said:
I've only had a quick scan, but that report is designed to support your ideas, and you know it. I love the way it separates out the general population and care homes, sort of like care homes are not real people. Also the way it blames the collapse of health care for increased death rates. Health care was nearly overwhelmed, try not locking down and see what a collapse is like then.

But anyway, I've not looked into it recently, it was an off the cuff comment from general reading, but most studies do not include deaths from patients that were not tested for covid. And at the start, tons died from covid when there were no available tests. So you can take your 0.5% and probably double it, otherwise it's just bending the stats to suit the aim. 1% is closer than 0.15%.

The main point of this is, just because you don't test for something, or didn't test dead people, does not mean it's not there. Plus treatment is imporving, so what was once 2% might now be 1%, but it's not 0.15%.

0.5% at 45k is 9 million infections, which would be nearly 14% immunity.
0.5% at 67k is 13.4 million infections, nearly 20% immunity, for the entire UK, I think not. London only had max 17% and that was twice the national average, and you would expect that to be higher than anywhere, like how New York was similar.

For me, I think the 67k based on 1% is more likely, so around 6.7m infections, around 10% of the uk population.
I think that we may have had a similar number of deaths saved by the additional measures but these were then roughly off-set by the hospitals being busy with covid. Can't treat others if the hospital is busy with people that can't breathe, which is a point these studies and lockdown avoiders keep missing.

Lets not forget the UK antibody study for the end of June in the UK had only shown 6% as having it.
Click to expand...


This video is well worth a watch. It isn’t some right wing conspiracy theorist who is discussing this. Dr Campbell has consistently picked through lots of released studies and updates around the whole pandemic, covering alsorts of topics. He breaks it down so it’s easier to get the gist of the study without having to read through all the detail, he provides links in the description for each study he discusses, so you can read for yourself.
This video about the IFR is very interesting and discusses the latest research around the IFR


I think people get hung up on the anti-body testing which is hugely flawed as a way of discerning the numbers exposed.
Most people will not produce antibodies.
Those that do, won’t produce them immediately.
Those that do, will only keep them for a matter of months,
So any test needs to be conducted within that detectable window.
If you do have an antibody test and it is positive, you have had covid.
If you have an antibody test and it comes back negative, it does not mean you have not had covid.
You may have been tested outside the window of antibody detection.
Or you may have dealt with the infection through the innate immune response and your killer T-Cells, which would mean antibodies were not produced. Antibodies are a bit like a last line of Defense, so only those sick enough or with some initial immune response issues will produce them.
Again, this isn’t complex immunology stuff that you need to be a scientist to have an understanding of. It’s fairly basic and common knowledge.
Which is why it is peculiar that it doesn’t seem to be being discussed at all by Sage publicly, unless I’ve missed it.
 
the_smog_chorus said:
I'm interested - please share the evidence.
Click to expand...
the_smog_chorus said:
His (a guy who works at James Cook) latest comment is:
Hi Fortunately we’re nowhere near what happened in April yet. It’s difficult to know how fast patient numbers will rise as we are in uncharted territory. However, what’s clear is that unless cases start to fall we will continue to admit more and more patients. I think it’s a question of just waiting and seeing what the next few weeks bring. Cheers, Richard

I would suggest that isn't evidence to the contrary of Dr Yeadon.

As @1finny said - One certainty is - we will know in a week or 2 if Yeadon et al are right. If they are not we can all move on.
Click to expand...
If you don’t think that blog is evidence of a pandemic then I’m not sure what proof I could provide you would make you think differently

for context the highest number on his blog for covid patients was 75 in the first wave. He quotes 50 in his latest one.
 
GazC_MFC said:
If you don’t think that blog is evidence of a pandemic then I’m not sure what proof I could provide you would make you think differently

for context the highest number on his blog for covid patients was 75 in the first wave. He quotes 50 in his latest one.
Click to expand...
A blog from one Doctor in one hospital is not proof of a pandemic.
 
MolteniArcore said:
The outbreak took off in London and then later moved north. They reopened the country at the same time, therefore it figures that virus levels may have been higher in the north than the south at the end of lockdown and the reasons we now see it taking off in the North West.

That isn't a stretch that needs a whole video and graphs explaining it, it's just logical no? And it doesn't mean that some guy who claims the pandemic is over is right.

If you want to see if the pandemic is over just turn on the news. Unless the worlds media is lying and wrong, and Youtube/Podcast guy is the only one who is right? It falls down at every level.
Click to expand...
So are you saying that the country is basically still in one wave?
 
GazC_MFC said:
Not sure what the obsession around it being one wave. Waves go up and down, but the water never disappears
Click to expand...

Which is kind of Yeadon’s point. This currently is a ripple from the tail end of the initial outbreak as we move indoors and enter the normal seasonal respiratory virus season, and the virus finds a bit of wiggle room through communities that weren’t perhaps as significantly exposed during the initial outbreak back in Easter.
Time will tell whether he is right or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top