AFTER two years of being closed for business, New Zealand has re-opened its borders. The outcome: unprecedented numbers are leaving rather than arriving. The question is, are you willing to take their place?
For those of you in the UK who are worried that there is one law for the government and another for the people, spare a thought for the people of New Zealand where the government is actually following its own advice.
At least in the UK you can look at your leaders partying and think ‘If they can do that, so can I’. We have to listen to the voices of our leaders filtered through a mask, and then follow them.
Last week I visited Wellington, seat of government and dull party central of the civil service. It was an extraordinary experience. Conformity to the fore. Masking was as near 100 per cent as makes no difference.
This has happened despite there being almost no evidence that masking reduces the spread of infection, and a great deal of evidence that it harms our health.
Medical mask exemptions will soon have to prominently display your name. Fines and jail sentences related to masking non-compliance are slated to be introduced.
Students still have to be fully vaxxed to enrol in universities. Many, if not most, apprenticeship schemes require Covid vaccination.
The government has allowed businesses to continue to enforce vaccination mandates, and many have. In some industries, even employees working from home are being required to show proof of Covid vaccination – to no one.
Just imagine if you are watching The Chase on TV and between every contestant you are subjected to a 60-second government Covid vaccine ad advising you to ‘keep your family safe’with an ineffective mRNA vaccine known to be dangerous. Not only do you know that it is borrowed money paying for this saturation government messaging, but you and your children are going to have to repay it for decades. You are not told that government statistics show that boosted individuals are more likely to end up in hospital with Covid than the unvaccinated – too embarrassing to warrant a media mention.
Can you imagine the level of despair if the leader of the opposition is also a vaccination freak? Ours is on record before the pandemic saying that single mothers should lose benefits if their children are unvaccinated.
Third party leader David Seymour (ACT Party) told people who have lost their jobs due to coercive mandates that it was their choice. So no joy there either.
The Green Party is more pro-mandate than the government and additionally would have us all back on bicycles. Their deputy leader struggled to hospital riding a bicycle to give birth while already in labour, presumably just to show us retirees how it is done.
Undercover surveillance is on the increase. Anti-mandate bloggers have had visits from the police.
Last week a 78-year-old farmer was fined $30,000 (£15,300) for selling a pail of raw milk to a government undercover agent who, along with his back-up team, had taken weeks to worm his way into the veteran farmer’s confidence. In contrast, France has made an international business success out of selling cheese made from raw milk. NZ, dairy capital of the world, has opted out of opportunity.
The government is ready and willing to encourage habits that damage health. Jacinda has famously said that NZ is on track to stamp out smoking within a decade but she forgot to mention that the government has encouraged the switch to vaping. A survey completed in November found an unprecedented and alarming 26 per cent of NZ school students vaped during the previous week. Another good markup for commercial pharma.
There is no end to our nanny state. This week it was suggested that the government would enter the supermarket business. We may soon be collecting our meagre processed rations from them.
So if it’s still on your bucket list and you will be visiting us, well done. Put on a brave face. You will need to test prior to departure and three more after landing. You may not know if anyone you meet is smiling or not, but you can always imagine that you are part of a fan club for the Mask of Zorro.
Oh, and by the way, our Labour tourism minister says NZ now wants to give preference to wealthy tourist. You may think that is a bit rich, or just a sign of an antisocial illness.
May 14, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, New Zealand |
Leave a comment
It’s still happening, and it needs to stop
Imagine you’re back in pre-school.
You’re sitting on the rug, listening to the teacher read a storybook. Suddenly, the nurse calls into the classroom. “Mrs. Jones? Can you send Bobby to the health office right away?”
You’re not sick, and you don’t take any medicines at school like your friend Michael does. Why do you have to go to the nurse?
When you arrive, the nurse tells you that someone else in your class has come down with a sickness called RSV. She can’t say who, but she knows you sit next to him at lunch. So he might have given you RSV, even if you don’t feel yucky yet.
She puts you in a separate room, with a mask on, until your mom can come and you can’t come back to school for 5 days, because if you get sick, you might get other kids sick.
Fast forward to your high school days…
You’re in your 5th period math class, seated in the last row. The nurse comes in just as the teacher says to take out last night’s homework. She leans over and whispers, “I need you to come with me. You were in close contact yesterday during school with someone who tested positive for flu. You didn’t get a flu shot, so you’ll need to go home.”
You have no idea who she’s talking about – and she won’t tell you how someone has decided you were in contact with this person, or why it matters. You’re not sick and you shouldn’t have to leave.
“I want to stay in class,” you whisper.
“No, you have to come with me,” she insists.
“There’s a test tomorrow. I need to stay,” you counter.
The nurse leaves. Five minutes later, two security guards and a Dean come in. Now it’s three versus one; you have no choice. They escort you out, call your parents, and you can’t return until next week on the condition that you present a negative flu test.
I wish these scenarios were fiction, but they’re not. Each is the real story of a child and a teen, respectively, in Chicagoland, from this school year. As you can guess, the illness each student was “guilty” of being exposed to was the eminently-survivable Covid-19.
I also wish these were the only students to which this happened over the past two years. Sadly, millions of children across the country have been individually forced to quarantine in the same manner – some repeatedly for upwards of 40 days or more total. They did nothing wrong; they committed no crime. In most cases, they’ve been denied due-process and equal-protection rights, simply for being in the same airspace as a peer who tested positive for and/or became sick with what is a low-risk respiratory virus for nearly all children.
The law and communicable disease code in my state (Illlinois) does not give schools the independent authority to “figure out” close contacts, or tell not-sick kids to stay home. Only local health departments can issue such orders to a person, who can object to the order and go before a judge.
Unfortunately, months of illegal executive orders, agency workarounds, fearful school boards, and dishonest legal advice have misled parents and the general public about the limits of the government’s ability to limit freedom of movement – including during a pandemic. In most places (Illinois included), we not only need appointed & elected officials to follow existing laws, we need new laws passed that ensure that children can’t be denied an in-person education because they might develop symptoms of an illness.
The truth is, contact-tracing and exposure quarantines are for highly localized outbreaks involving actually-sick people and pathogens that aren’t airborne, seasonal, and endemic. To my knowledge, there’s no evidence that either strategy has been critical to keeping kids in schools during this pandemic. Data recently published by the CDC estimates that over 75% of American children and teens had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 as of December 2021. (Marty Makary rightly notes the current figure is closer to 90%.)

Any school or health department still pretending that Covid is deadly for healthy children – or that it’s possible to prevent the spread of a cold – is either self-interested or deeply deluded.
Evidence of the devastating impacts of keeping kids out of school – either via whole-building closures or individual exclusions – will continue to mount. I predict that class-action lawsuits will be filed eventually, but for now, parents must demand their schools stop accusing children of exposure.
May 13, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | Covid-19, Human rights, United States |
Leave a comment
I take issue with the conclusions of a paper published in the peer-reviewed journal Science of the Total Environment under the title “Managing an evolving pandemic: Cryptic circulation of the Delta variant during the Omicron rise.”
These authors tend to believe that wastewater-based epidemiology combined with mathematical modeling allows for making predictions in regard of the evolutionary dynamics of this pandemic:
“According to the developed model, it can be expected that the Omicron levels will decrease until eliminated, while Delta variant will maintain its cryptic circulation. If this comes to pass, the mentioned cryptic circulation may result in the reemergence of a Delta morbidity wave or in the possible generation of a new threatening variant.”
One should – per definition – always be careful and skeptical about conclusions and predictions proposed by scientists who don’t seem to have an in-depth understanding of the immunology involved!
Variants can only replace previous variants provided they have a higher level of INTRINSIC infectiousness! It’s not because Omicron is highly infectious in vaccinees (i.e., in the vast majority of highly vaccinated population such as the population of Israel) that Omicron will replace Delta in wastewater! It has been published that diminished neutralizing capacity of anti-spike (S) antibodies (Abs)results in disproportionally high binding of non-neutralizing Abs to S-NTD (N-terminal domain of S protein), which explains enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees to breakthrough infection with Omicron but inhibits viral shedding and trans infection of Omicron at distant organs, including the lower respiratory and gastrointestinal tract, thereby reducing the incidence of severe disease in vaccinees (…). So, in other words, Ab-mediated enhancement of infection with Omicron in vaccinees does not translate into enhanced viral shedding from the gastrointestinal tract, which is the primary source of wastewater contamination. On the other hand, diminished shedding in vaccinees is likely compensated by its prolonged duration due to a delay in viral clearance (…). Selective shedding of highly infectious Omicron in vaccinees causes Omicron detection levels in wastewater to rapidly increase to then level off at wastewater detection levels that are higher than those observed for Delta. However, as the amount of Omicron virus shed from the gastrointestinal tract of vaccinees is not determined by the level of Omicron infectiousness in these vaccinated individuals but by the percentage of the population that got vaccinated and because Omicron’s intrinsic infectiousness is similar to that of Delta and, therefore, shed in comparable amounts by the non-vaccinated fraction of the population, it is not surprising to find that – although shed at a somewhat higher concentration in a highly vaccinated population – the Omicron variant is not replacing the Delta variant unless the population were to become vaccinated across all age groups (i.e., including children). Consequently, wastewater-based epidemiology does not supply a real-time image of viral infectivity / transmissibility in highly vaccinated populations as viral infectious behavior in such populations is not primarily determined by the intrinsic infectiousness of the viral variant but by Ab-mediated enhancement of viral infection in vaccinees.
In conclusion, monitoring of Delta and Omicron detection levels in wastewater restricts surveillance of prevalent variants to virus shed from the gastrointestinal tract and thereby ignores antibody-mediated mitigation of shedding. It, therefore, misrepresents differences in viral infectiousness, which is known to be very high for Omicron in a highly vaccinated population due to Ab-dependent enhancement of infection at the level of the upper respiratory tract.
Once again, mathematical modeling may be a challenging and fascinating exercise but is to be considered totally worthless when the immunological assumptions are wrong. It inevitably implies that the essence of the model predictions will also be wrong. There can be no doubt that population-level immune pressure on trans infection-inhibiting Abs is now paving the way for breeding variants that are not only highly infectious but also highly virulent in vaccinees. However, in contrast to what the authors of this publication believe, these new variants will not emerge from previous Delta variants. Delta does not enable highly vaccinated populations (e.g., the Israeli population) to exert immune pressure on viral virulence, simply because it is not fully resistant to potentially neutralizing anti-RBD Abs. So, please forget about any predictions derived from mathematical modeling that – despite lots of complexity – totally ignores the impact of population-level immune pressure on the infectious behavior of the virus. Such predictions are, of course, completely useless when it comes to understanding the evolutionary dynamics and management of a pandemic that has fully changed its natural course as a direct consequence of mass vaccination.
May 12, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine |
Leave a comment
Nearly every facet of the pandemic is iatrogenic
STAT News has a new article titled, “The ‘five pandemics’ driving 1 million U.S. Covid deaths.” Like almost everything they publish, the article is clever, well-written, and almost entirely wrong. The author, J. Emory Parker, claims that the pandemic is primarily a story of older, unvaccinated, rural, poor people with a deadly initial wave that has faded into a lower infection fatality rate today. I’m not going to refute it point-by-point other than to say that he is missing the forest for the trees.
Democrats now interpret all data through the lens of The Narrative(TM) that makes Dems look like heroes, Pharma look like Gods, and Republicans look like unwashed barbarians who deserve death for their failure to obey their betters. It’s not so much science as bougie-supremacy. Self-reflection, paradox, and admitting mistakes are of course banned from the bougie lexicon.
In this short article, I’ve stolen his title (in hopes of messing with the search engines) and I set the record straight. Any honest assessment of the last two years leads to the inexorable conclusion that every facet of the pandemic is a direct result of the intellectual and moral failures of the “expert class” itself.
1. Tony Fauci created the pandemic by funding risky gain-of-function research at a bioweapons lab in Wuhan China. Somehow a chimera virus, engineered to be more lethal to humans, escaped. No Tony Fauci, no pandemic. All else flows from this.
2. Fauci, the FDA, and CDC blocked access to prophylaxis and early treatment. The CDC’s own research showed that chloroquine is safe and effective for prophylaxis and early treatment of SARS coronaviruses (hydroxychloroquine is even safer than chloroquine). The U.S. had a massive stockpile for this very purpose that was never used. About 90% of Covid-19 fatalities in the U.S. could have been prevented if public health officials had followed proper protocols and used about twenty off-the-shelf treatments that are safe and effective. Instead the FDA and CDC ridiculed the best treatments, stopped doctors from prescribing them, and prohibited pharmacies from filling these prescriptions.
3. Hospitals used the wrong protocols and continue to use the wrong protocols. Failing to provide early treatment (turning people away from hospitals to preserve capacity), ventilators, and Remdesivir are all death sentences. Large hospitals have such abysmal outcomes because they used the wrong protocols and they seem to have no ability to course-correct based on actual data.
4. Blue states that followed the CDC’s advice to return Covid+ patients to nursing homes committed senicide — the systematic murder of the elderly. The death toll in the elderly was and is so high because they were never provided prophylaxis, immune support, nor any early treatment and their residences were intentionally seeded with the sick — once again in the misguided attempt to preserve hospital capacity(TM).
5. Promoting mass injections with negative efficacy, keeps the pandemic going indefinitely. These useless shots also seem to be driving the evolution of variants. The pandemic will never end as long as the government continues to promote these mRNA shots that lack sterilizing immunity.
The entire pandemic, from the origins, through the early days, until now, is a self-inflicted, man-made crisis. This is iatrogenic pandemicide — created, spread, and made more deadly by the people who claim that they are “experts”. Everything that public health has done for two years has made things significantly worse. As long as the people who are wrong about everything remain in power, the crisis will continue.
This is why we need a revolution.
May 12, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | CDC, Covid-19, FDA, United States |
Leave a comment
Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed
Have you read How to Prevent the Next Pandemic by Bill Gates yet? Well, I have, and let me tell you: it’s every bit as infuriating, nauseating, ridiculous, laughable and risible as you would expect. Here are the details.
Watch on Archive / BitChute / Odysee or Download the mp4
For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.
For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).
SHOW NOTES:
How to Prevent the Next Pandemic (video)
Who Is Bill Gates?
I Read The Great Narrative (So You Don’t Have To!)
Fact Check: Polio Vaccines, Tetanus Vaccines and the Gates Foundation
Partners in Health
A Framework for Understanding Pathogens, Explained by Sunetra Gupta
Rahm Emanuel argument
Meet the GERM team
Episode 417 – The Global Pandemic Treaty: What You Need to Know
Trump calling the Warp Speed MAGA jabs his “greatest achievement”
Trump was going to appoint RFK Jr. to head a vaccine safety panel
Bill Gates told him it was a bad idea?
Who Is Bill Gates?
WHO Cares What Celebrities Think – #PropagandaWatch
Japan logged record low number of newborns in 2021 with 842,897
The Real Anthony Fauci
A Letter to the Future
May 10, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Book Review, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, Human rights |
Leave a comment
On May 5th, the World Health Organisation (WHO) issued a new report estimating global excess deaths at 14.9m for two years of the pandemic 2020-21 as the true COVID-19 mortality toll, nearly triple the official toll of 5.44m. “Excess mortality” is the difference between the number of deaths that would be expected in any time period based on data from earlier years and the number of deaths that have occurred. For countries with robust data surveillance, reporting and recording systems, this poses no real difficulty. Unfortunately, these conditions are not met in many countries. Therefore their excess mortality can only be estimated and the accuracy is a function of the reliability of the methodology and modelling used in the exercise. Given the overwhelming evidence about the flaws and deficiencies of Covid-related modelling over the last two years, and the damage caused by governments trusting modelling projections over real-world data, this should immediately throw up a forest of red flags about the WHO report.
A second reason to be sceptical is the less than stellar role of the WHO in its well-known Covid-related deference to China, the abandonment of its own summary of the state of the art science on managing pandemics from October 2019, its willingness to manipulate definitions of ‘herd immunity’ in relation to vaccines and natural immunity in order to fit with the experimental pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) that came to dominate Covid policy around the world, and its self-interest in expanding its budget, authority and role in steering global health policies and management by means of a new international treaty.
A third ground for scepticism is they ascribe the total death count to the direct effects of Covid “due to the disease” and indirect effects “due to the pandemic’s impact on health systems and society”. The first part is questionable because it fails to distinguish between deaths with and from Covid. The second is disingenuous because the indirect toll of the NPIs (lockdowns, masks, induced fear, lost schooling, lost jobs, cancelled screenings and operations, aborted immunisation programs, disruptions to global food production and distribution, etc.) and vaccine-related adverse events will prove to be significantly higher than the indirect effects of the disease per se. Any study that fails to disaggregate deaths caused by the disease and by policy interventions to mitigate it lacks credibility.

Figure 1: India’s COVID-19 Deaths, Jan. 1st 2020-Mar. 27th 2022. Source: World Life Expectancy, May 8th 2022
Like many others including Will Jones on this site, I was especially struck by the new figures for India. The report pushes India up to the very top of the Covid mortality toll with 4.74m deaths, nearly 10 times more than the count of 481,486 (as of December 31st 2021), almost one-third of the world total. Sorry, but that is simply not credible.
India’s geographic diversity, population size and economic conditions make data collection especially challenging. In public lectures in Australia and Canada, to drive home the point about the scale, I usually comment that the entire Australian population is a rounding error in 1.3bn-strong India. It suffers from persistent and widespread mass poverty – India is a country of a few mega-billionaires amidst the world’s biggest pool of poor, illiterate and sick people bar none. It might be nuclear-armed, but state capacity when it comes to administration and public and social services is easily the worst of all major economies. The public sector scores high on petty corruption but low on efficiency. The public health service is risible and high quality healthcare is neither accessible nor affordable for ordinary Indians. The best doctors work in the public sector, in medium to large clinics and hospitals in metropolitan centres and as individual practitioners in most towns and villages. Consequently, health statistics are not all that reliable. But this is a general pathology, not one unique to COVID-19.
From everything I know about India, the WHO estimate does not align with overall death data, historical trends and Covid death compensation claims on the Indian Government from states. Indian experts believe that official statistics capture over 90% of all deaths. But this also means that about 10% of deaths would have been missed in previous years, yet the WHO’s ‘excess deaths’ count uses the official numbers as the baseline against which to estimate the impact of Covid. In a related vein, why would under-reporting be limited to Covid-related deaths and not, say, to suicides with its heavy social stigma and traffic accidents where the operators of overloaded buses and vans would try to drastically reduce actual numbers in order to hide the illegal loads (Figure 2)? The WHO estimates are flawed also in relying on 2019 deaths instead of using a five year average 2015-19 to wrinkle out anomalies in any given year.

Figure 2: India’s Top Dozen Killer Diseases (March 1st 2020-May 7th 2022). Top six cancers in order: oral, lung, breast, cervical, stomach, colon. Source: Chart constructed by author drawing on data from World Life Expectancy, May 8th 2022
Estimates of India’s total annual death rate range from 738 per 100,000 people by the World Bank to 1,030 per 100,000 people by World Life Expectancy. The total annual death toll therefore would be somewhere in the 10-13 million range: a very wide range. The WHO estimate of the death rate for 2021 is within the higher range from World Life Expectancy. Simply put, the WHO estimate of all-cause deaths is within any realistic estimate of the margin of error in India’s unique circumstances of scale and state capacity.
The caveats to official data notwithstanding, the WHO estimate would mean almost one-quarter additional deaths than normal. In fact it’s worse. Looking at the detailed tables, the 4.74m excess deaths is calculated from a combined excess death rate for 2020–21 of 171 per 100,00 people. This is disaggregated into 60 and 280 per 100,000 people for 2020 and 2021, respectively. That would imply a 38% jump in all cause deaths in 2021. Despite all the horror scenes we saw on TV of corpses lying in the streets and washed ashore on riverbanks, that’s just not possible. Perhaps the clue to the error lies in the title of the actual document: “Global excess deaths associated with COVID-19 (modelled estimates)” (emphasis added).
Some Daily Sceptic readers had fun with this aspect of the WHO announcement. My favourite exchange was this:

India’s own estimates of excess deaths for 2020 compared to 2019 is 480,000, of which Covid-related deaths were just under 150,000. So over 300,000 excess deaths were due to non-Covid causes, which in itself is far more believable because of the impact of the lockdown measures on exacerbating most of the conditions underlying India’s leading causes of deaths. By contrast, in 2021 the Covid-related death toll was much higher at 332,492.
Much as I have been critical in the past of official dismissals of international reports on India including weakening democratic practices, in this instance the Government is right to reject the WHO methodology of mathematical modelling based on data on 17 Indian states collected from websites and media reports: “This reflects a statistically unsound and scientifically questionable methodology of data collection for making excess mortality projections in the case of India.” As well as defective data collection methodology, the report is marred also by three critically flawed assumptions: that uncounted excess deaths occurred only in 2020-21 and not before; they occurred only for COVID-19 and not other diseases; and Covid-related deaths were due solely to the disease and not caused by policy interventions to control and eradicate it.
Ramesh Thakur is Emeritus Professor at the Australian National University’s Crawford School of Public Policy and a former UN Assistant Secretary-General.
May 8, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science | Covid-19, India, WHO |
Leave a comment
Acclaimed vaccinologist, Geert Vanden Bossche, sits down for his second groundbreaking interview with Del to explain why the intense pressure mass vaccination is putting on the Covid-19 virus will likely drive it to become catastrophically deadly.
May 8, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine |
Leave a comment
Divisive and false claims that the unvaccinated are a danger
This paper, published in the “peer-reviewed” Canadian Medical Association Journal, quite simply represents an amoral, unethical and utterly transparent attempt to use pseudoscientific modelling to fabricate a false narrative. The apparent objective seems to be sowing divisions in society by marginalising and vilifying the unvaccinated.
The paper describes a “study” which is nothing of the sort. It actually describes a model which the authors have constructed. This is an unnecessarily complex model — and suspiciously so. The model itself has been very expertly taken apart by Jessica Rose here and Drs Rancourt and Hickey for the Ontario Civil Liberties Association here.
The authors appear to have tested their model to death to find the optimal combination of inputs which results in the “narrative” they wish to promote.
The logical flaws in this approach have been brilliantly analysed by Dr Byram Bridle, including a critique of the assumptions made for the various input parameters. Among the more egregious examples are:
(1) the model assumes 80% effectiveness against infection for the Covid injections vs omicron, whereas real-world data suggests zero — at best.
(2) the model assumes very little pre-pandemic immunity present within the community (they assume just 20% when for some time the evidence has suggested much higher levels, especially against severe illness).
(3) the model assumes no waning of efficacy at all over time, a claim not even made by the most ardent promoters of the covid vaccines.
Many news outlets — including Forbes — appear to have been taken in by this sham science and are reporting it as a bone fide “study” with no critical analysis whatsoever, this being their key message:
“The findings counter the common argument that the decision to get vaccinated is a personal one, the researchers said, as the unvaccinated are ”likely to affect the health and safety of vaccinated people in a manner disproportionate to the fraction of unvaccinated people in the population.”
One commentator on Twitter acerbically — though rather accurately — summed up the Forbes article thus:

It is quite clear that the model and the entire article has been constructed to push a political agenda, namely to neutralise the growing realisation by the population that the story they were told in relation to the Covid 19 injections is entirely false. Contrary to the authorities’ official narrative, in the context of Omicron the injections don’t reduce infections or transmission, and actually probably even increase them. Far from being a selfish act, it was in fact entirely rational — and beneficial to one’s fellow man — to decline the injection.
To use Dr Bridle’s words, the paper is actually “Fiction Disguised as Science to Promote Hatred”.
We support and join the many voices calling for this paper to be retracted.
Postscript: When Denis Rancourt, one of the authors of the Ontario Civil Liberties Association’s statement, tweeted the essence of their complaint with it, the paper’s author — David Fisman — didn’t respond by way of any form of scientific justification — he threatened legal action.
May 7, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | Canada, Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine |
Leave a comment
Virologists pushed back on the possibility of tighter regulation of viruses tweaked in the lab to be more lethal at a public meeting Wednesday.
An enhanced pandemic potential pathogen is a virus or microbe that has gained increased transmissibility — capacity to spread from person to person and reverberate throughout a population — or virulence — capacity to cause serious disease.
Experiments that are reasonably anticipated to generate deadlier pathogens are supposed to receive heightened oversight from the Department of Health and Human Services under what is nicknamed the HHS “P3CO,” short for the pandemic potential pathogen committee.
Though established just a few years ago, critics say the committee’s work is hidden from public view, suffers from glaring loopholes and needs a reboot. Work that contributes to vaccine development or results from viral surveillance efforts in nature is exempted from this extra layer of review, for example.
Speculation by some in the U.S. intelligence community that SARS-CoV-2 may have seeped out of a lab at the pandemic’s epicenter may have prompted a public meeting to consider whether current policies are adequate. Reporting irregularities by a nonprofit partner of the lab involved in gain-of-function research on coronaviruses and funded by the National Institutes of Health called EcoHealth Alliance has also led many to conclude the P3CO needs to apply to more research projects and be more accountable to the public.
One million Americans have died of COVID-19. A review by the U.S. intelligence community last summer about whether the novel coronavirus spilled over from an animal or spilled out of a lab was inconclusive.
The Office of Science and Technology Policy and NIH cohosted the meeting Wednesday.
White House COVID-19 testing czar Tom Inglesby was harshly critical of the existing framework. His top recommendation: Scientists should be required to explain in detail the goals of undertaking such research in the first place, and why less perilous methods could not reach the same goal.
“There must be an extraordinary and public justification,” he said. “I do think there are experiments we shouldn’t do.”
But lobbying groups representing virologists and other life scientists pushed back.
“The systems of review should not be a solution looking for a problem,” said Felicia Goodrum, president of the American Society for Virology.
Goodrum said regulation risks “tying two hands behind our backs” when it comes to modeling pandemic risks.
Goodrum added that the inherently unpredictable nature of manipulating viruses means that it’s unwieldy to determine whether or not an experiment will make a virus more dangerous, so the regulations should be lax.
“We must be careful about dichotomizing research as simply either ‘risky’ or not because it is not possible to absolutely predict the biology of a virus with the committee,” she said.
But Gregory Koblentz, director of the biodefense graduate program at George Mason University, said that an EcoHealth Alliance grant that funded research that made coronaviruses more deadly by swapping their spike proteins is emblematic of lapses in oversight at NIH.
The research was not regulated as gain-of-function work, but NIH did add language to the grant requiring extra reporting if the viral engineering led to viruses that were 10 times more pathogenic. (The chimeric viruses proved to be much more pathogenic than even that threshold, but EcoHealth Alliance did not report it.) That language amounts to a “tacit admission” that NIH reasonably anticipated the work was gain of function, Koblentz said.
Stefano Bertuzzi, CEO of the American Society for Microbiology, conceded that labs should report more often to Congress and that scientists could do a better job allaying public concerns, but stated that the framework is otherwise sufficient.
Bertuzzi signaled he is concerned that Congress could step in.
Labs taking steps toward greater transparency “helps guard against well intended but sometimes overly prescriptive legislative approaches that could undermine the important work that needs to take place.”
Gigi Gronvall, senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, said that the “breathless hyping of risks” overshadows strong existing biosafety measures, such as U.S. efforts to train maximum containment labs abroad.
Asked which risks have been misunderstood, Gronvall said that “there is a lot of gray” and that the proper expertise is needed to interpret gain-of-function experiments, but did not go into further detail.
Indeed, some experts called for decreased transparency for controversial research. Colorado State University Biosafety Rebecca Moritz called for limiting the scope of public records requests. U.S. Right to Know has submitted a public information request for records about the university’s research on bat coronaviruses in collaboration with EcoHealth Alliance, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
The documents raise questions about the contagion risks, for example, of shipping of bats and rats infected with dangerous pathogens.
Kanta Subbarao, director of the World Health Organization’s Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Influenza, disputed the idea that research that contributes to vaccine development or results from surveillance should be included in the framework.
Many representatives of the life science and biodefense fields emphasized weighing any regulation against lost opportunities for science. But members of the public who participated in the meeting were much more skeptical of the value of certain gain-of-function work.
Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute, said that the public should not be surprised by controversial gain-of-function experiments for the first time in scientific papers, long after the research has been approved and completed.
Chan called for controversial experiments to be published on preprint servers and the genomes of novel viruses to be deposited into publicly available databases within a year of discovery.
She also called for greater transparency from private “virus hunting” organizations and middlemen between the NIH and labs, an apparent allusion to the EcoHealth Alliance and the Global Virome Project.
Kevin Esvelt, a biologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said creating novel viruses in the lab, combined with the ease of synthesizing viruses from a genome sequence, poses a national security threat.
“More Americans have died of COVID than would perish if a Russian Topol SS-25 thermonuclear warhead were to be detonated in the center of Washington, DC,” said Esvelt. “Pandemic viruses can be more lethal than thermonuclear weapons. That makes them a proliferation concern.”
May 7, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Covid-19, United States |
Leave a comment
A recent paper describes the first ever double-blind randomised trial of Vitamin D for the prophylaxis of Covid.
HART has been one of many voices previously highlighting the evidence for the role of Vitamin D deficiency in preventing severe outcomes from Covid infections, and questioning why the very safe and cheap measure of ensuring adequate intake was being ignored.
The new paper outlines a study conducted in healthcare workers in Mexico. They randomly allocated subjects (who were only eligible if they had not had covid)) to receive either 4000 IU of Vit D or placebo. The data from 94 Vit D recipients and 98 who received placebo, were included in the per-protocol analysis.
The double-blind study was conducted in late 2020, thus removing vaccination as a possible confounding factor. Covid infection was confirmed by the presence of a positive PCR test following swab testing performed at several time points during the follow-up period, or by positive antibody testing at day 45.
The results are quite extraordinary, demonstrating a highly statistically-significant 78% reduction in becoming infected if a member of the Vit D prophylaxis group; 6 out of 94 Vit D recipients caught Covid, compared to 24 out of 98 on placebo. Notwithstanding that the trial was conducted during a period of high prevalence, the rate of infection in the placebo groups seems high, although the trial was of healthcare workers, and nothing suggests the comparison between the 2 groups is invalidated by the apparent high rate of infection.
One particularly notable observation from the data is that the effect was seen regardless of whether the baseline Vit D level indicated deficiency or not, possibly indicating that the optimal minimum for Vit D levels might be higher than currently thought.
Several criticisms and open questions about the study can be posed. In particular, the study was (obviously) not powered to detect any effects on the incidence of severe disease, and the clinical relevance of preventing infections per se, when, regardless of vaccination status, infections appear to be a prerequisite for full, flexible and durable immunity, must be questionable.
Nevertheless, the study is notable for being randomised and double-blind, and for the magnitude of the observed effect. It integrates into the body of knowledge which is building in relation to the role of Vit D in optimal immunity, and as such supports HART’s contention that willfully ignoring the potential for reducing the burden of Covid on our society with this safe, cheap and simple measure has been nothing short of scandalous.
A detailed thread critiquing some aspects of the study can be seen here.
May 6, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Covid-19 |
Leave a comment
Vermont, for example…
AP: CDC: Half Of Vermont’s 14 Counties Have High COVID-19 Levels
Half of Vermont’s 14 counties have been rated as having high community levels of COVID-19, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The rankings are based on a handful of factors including new hospital admissions for COVID-19, recent case counts, and the community’s overall hospital capacity. Washington County reported the highest number of cases per 100,000 individuals, followed by Chittenden County and Bennington County. The other counties with high community levels of the virus are Addison, Franklin, Grand Isle and Orleans. (5/1) Kaiser Health News.
So much for those high vaccination rates, coupled with people staying home. Vermont is the most rural of US states; in other words, a smaller percent of Vermont’s 624,000 residents live in cities than in any other state. So there were fewer opportunities for crowds.
The lesson is that with endemic viruses, you get it now or you get it later. Have the vaccines worked for more than a few months, it might have been different.
In Maine, I learned today that 70% of COVID deaths in the past month were in the vaccinated–the vaccine is not saving lives, despite what Rochelle may claim while batting her eyelashes and trying to appear earnest.
May 6, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, United States |
Leave a comment