Read on Twitter
Reading the transcript of Whitty/Vallance lecture yesterday. I quote: “so about eight per cent, so 3 million or so people, may have been infected and have antibodies. It means that the vast majority of us are not protected in any way and are susceptible to this disease”.
Now had he said this on the floor of the House, he would have been guilty of misleading the House & made to come back, apologise profusely & set the record straight. But he wasn’t & also didn’t take any questions. I have to tell you that it’s not a matter of opinion. He’s LYING.
We know from the shape of the daily deaths vs time curve in U.K. & elsewhere that there is a force which caused the rapidly expanding pandemic in March to slow down & then to continue spreading at an ever decreasing rate, having already begun to decline before lockdown. This is..
...crucial. As it wasn’t lockdown which terminated the rapid expansion, alternative candidates for that force, which we are certain exists by inspection of the graph, are required. There is ONLY ONE candidate for that force. It is reducing remaining population susceptibility.
As that fell continuously, R was soon below 1 & stayed like that for 16 weeks straight. That our curve is the same shape as that in multiple other countries, including Sweden, ignoring our puny efforts to influence transmission of this respiratory virus, tells us with 100%...
...confidence that a substantial proportion of the U.K. population has already been infected & most have survived. Crucially it’s been demonstrated by at least 4 “Oxbridge quality” labs in several countries around the world, than in all cases, 20-50% of people had T-cell immune..
..recognition of SARS-COV-2 BEFORE the new virus was even identified. Add those newly infected to those already resistant to the virus, and there is the locus of the force bearing down on transmission. There isn’t any serious doubt about it. To antibodies. The reason I accuse..
..Sir Patrick, in public, of LYING is that I know that he, like me, is well aware of much literature on the extent to which infected people produce antibodies. Only the most seriously ill were certain to produce antibodies at high levels which persisted for some time. But those..
..who were infected & had a milder course of illness, not all produced antibodies & their levels fell away rather speedily. Those who were infected yet showed few times no symptoms did not go in to produce antibodies. The reasons make sense, too. If you resisted the virus...
...easily, you didn’t need to go through the slow & energetically expensive route of making antibodies, because you had other, perhaps so called “innate immune” mechanisms to protect you. Come along months later & test people for antibodies: of course you’ll find only those...
...people who had a bad time of it. Most of the others didn’t need antibodies & will be negative but they have been infected. Plainly put: the % with antibodies HUGELY underestimated the proportion of the population who are resistant to infection. Don’t believe them when they...
..scare you with their extreme predictions. It’s between implausible & impossible for a resurgence, which I term a #SecondaryRipple , to grow to any great size. It won’t rise anything like as speedily as in spring. It will soon plateau, begin to decline & that will be that.
A test: if the position was not, broadly, as I’ve painted it, you’d expect the most rapid resurgence in dense population centres, like London. That isn’t what’s happening. The reemergence is mostly limited to NW & NE, areas where probably the mixing of people was less complete...
...before our foolish Govt put in place additional restrictions. It was this which prevented us being where Sweden now is. But if we keep our nerve & pay attention to the experienced & pragmatic Prof Carl Heneghan, this will soon be over. It’s completely ludicrous that our...
...appear even to be contemplating more, chaotic & destructive acts. Anyone with influence on their MP, I beg of you: download this tweet string, send it to your MP & tell them I will personally explain this to them: they can decide if they’re being lied to.
They are.
Sue me.
They are.
Sue me.
(I missed the word ‘politicians’ between the last two tweets)
