Read on Twitter
You may have read the rather moderate requests made in the ‘Great Barrington Declaration’, drafted by three top quality scientists of whom one is Oxford’s Prof Sunetra Gupta. That document has been savaged by several people who’s so-called rebuttals can be found at this link:
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-barrington-declaration-an-open-letter-arguing-against-lockdown-policies-and-for-focused-protection/
Encouragingly, a Fiona Fox argues we should hear directly from scientists. Odd, then, that the rebuttal above has no mechanism to respond to it.
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/covid-19-why-we-need-to-hear-the-evidence-directly-from-the-scientists/
Fiona Fox’s blog, helpfully, does have a comment forum below her piece. So I decided..
Encouragingly, a Fiona Fox argues we should hear directly from scientists. Odd, then, that the rebuttal above has no mechanism to respond to it.
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/covid-19-why-we-need-to-hear-the-evidence-directly-from-the-scientists/
Fiona Fox’s blog, helpfully, does have a comment forum below her piece. So I decided..
...to comment there, responding just to one particularly egregious piece of nonsense in one of the letters. As I expect the SMC won’t release my comment, I thought I’d post it here:
1. We don’t know that immunity to the coronavirus wanes over time. While circulating antibody...
1. We don’t know that immunity to the coronavirus wanes over time. While circulating antibody...
... levels wanes over time, that does not mean the individual loses protection. In fact, it’s not only expected but the rule rather than the exception that this occurs. Consider the serum in which those antibodies are dissolved. If you had to keep in circulation a high...
... concentration of antibodies against everything to which your body had immunity, there wouldn’t be room for your blood cells! What keeps you protected are the memory cells of your immune system, T-cells which orchestrate accelerated responses if ever you encounter the...
... virus again & B-cells which rapidly expand & secrete fresh antibodies when needed. We know by studying cells in those who survived SARS in 2003 that their T-cell memory is present & vigorous, 17y later.
2. While a tiny number of apparent re-infections have been...
2. While a tiny number of apparent re-infections have been...
... recorded, I don’t think a single case of serious illness has resulted from such a re-infection. The more relevant statistic is that of the 750,000,000 people which the WHO has estimated have so far been infected, 99.999% of them have not been re-infected. That’s why...
... the pandemic is self limiting wherever low interventions have been chosen (eg Sweden, Malawi), or have otherwise occurred Despite best efforts (eg. U.K.).
3. Herd immunity is without any doubt the force responsible for bringing the spring pandemic under control. Lockdown...
3. Herd immunity is without any doubt the force responsible for bringing the spring pandemic under control. Lockdown...
... started after the rate of infection had already begun to fall as grumpily acknowledged by Prof Whitty to a select committee in July. Once this is appreciated, a candidate is required to explain how a rapidly expanding pandemic was converted into one which was expanding...
... ever more slowly until it stopped expanding. No one has put forward a single alternative force than diminished remaining % susceptibility in the population, aka ‘herd immunity’.
If I had nothing else to do, I could rebut all of the so-called rebuttals, except those points...
If I had nothing else to do, I could rebut all of the so-called rebuttals, except those points...
...which are fair & would required further thought. To what extent is what we do each winter in relation to influenza a model to follow for SARS-CoV-2? It’s claimed we have vaccines for ‘flu & some antiviral drugs. But not having these for covid19 makes ‘focused protection’ a...
...non-starter. But is that a reasonable excuse? I don’t agree that it is. First, much is made of the reduction in risk from this strategy with ‘flu. But is that true? I argue it’s not. First, ‘flu vaccines rarely work well. In only 3 of the last 10y have we even achieved a 50%..
...level of protection, and usually it’s a great deal worse. Second, the most vulnerable, the very old & ill, often develop very weak responses to vaccines. Next, the treatments for the most severe consequences of ‘flu are arguably less developed & less effective than there are..
...already for Covid19. We’ve good protocols for oxygen masks, we know to watch coagulation parameters & can use a range of modern anti-coagulants & we’ve recently shown a substantial benefit for the most severely ill patients with Covid19 who require ventilation, where...
...anti-inflammatory corticosteroids are distinctly beneficial. Finally, we don’t know at this time of the year how mild or severe will be the ‘flu season. Given my interpretation of the state of population susceptibility to Covid19 now (as compared with March) I think I can...
...make a robust case that by far the greater risk to the elderly & ill not making it to next spring arises first from ‘flu (to which most have little protection, despite the vaccine) & the generally poor access we most have to the NHS in the coming months. While Covid19 does...
...remain a threat to those vulnerable people, finding ways to facilitate acquisition of personal immunity & collectively, community protection by catching & surviving Covid19 is precisely what we are going to do in relation to ‘flu.
If my motives had nothing whatsoever to...
If my motives had nothing whatsoever to...
...do with “the science” & everything to do with extending this macabre business of irrationally scaring everyone into doing things their instincts tell them are wrong, but doing it anyway, I too would have drafted those appallingly badly thought out “rebuttals”. Shame on you.
