Jump to content

Rebuilding the World


Recommended Posts

I know some here are perfectly happy with how the pandemic was managed, but many people are not.  

What do you think could be improved on for future issues?

This article lists quite a few things that should be done to better prepare us and things that should NOT be done next time.  Take a boo.  I just posted the part of the article with the suggestions, for easy copy & pasting for discussion.  But the whole article is good and the first part lays out the reasons for some of the suggestions.

This pandemic will haunt us all for decades in ways that we can barely imagine at
this point. The nature and sheer scale of the interventions that we have witnessed
are staggering, and the consequences – social, political and economic – remain
unforeseeable. There are no systematic accounts of the implications and
repercussions seen so far, nor do we have any idea about the number of indirect
deaths due to the lockdowns/curfews, the “social distancing” and the “self-
isolation.” We have yet to see a realistic plan that would outline how we might learn
to live with a virus that is unlikely to disappear any time soon (Sullivan and
Chalkidou 2020).
In the meantime, I suggest that we reframe the corona conversation to cut through
the confusion and dimness that is pervading this pandemic in the following ways:

(99+) What Went Wrong Corona and the World after the Full Stop | Mabrouk El-Sharkawy - Academia.edu

 

I. Orientations
1. The emergence of new viruses in human populations is normal. It has happened
before; it will happen again.
2. Coronaviruses are common and circulate widely in humans. They have infected
people and killed thousands year after year, especially in winter.
3. Worldwide, between 300,000 to 500,000 people die from influenza viruses every
year. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has killed 300,000 people so far. There is no doubt,
SARS-CoV-2 is causing a serious infectious disease, but so far it is still in the range
of what we observe in terms of mortality during a severe influenza season. The main
difference is the speed of infection, the clinical picture of the disease and the impact
on demographically older populations causing massive compression of morbidity and
mortality that is overwhelming weak healthcare systems with no excess and little
surge capacity.
4. The 1957 influenza pandemic killed between 1 and 2 million people worldwide and
the 1968 influenza pandemic killed between 2 and 4 million people. As of the writing
of this article, Covid-19 has killed 300,000 people, according to the official numbers.
Clearly, the world has witnessed worse pandemics, including 1,3 million deaths due
to TB each year, 770,000deaths due to HIV infections each year and 435,000 deaths
due to malaria,all preventable and treatable conditions.
5. This observation does not mean that influenza and Covid-19 are clinically similar or
that nothing should be done to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and mitigate the
consequences. However, it raises the question of why fear and panic are spreading
like a wildfire, provoking such extreme measures,and why experts and government
officials are willing to mount an unprecedented effort for SARS-CoV-2 but have never
ever even considered similar interventions for the 300,000 to 500,000 people who die
every year due to influenza. Influenza is a relatively well-known virus. To say
thatSARS-CoV-2 is an unknown virus doesn’t automatically justify the most extreme
measures that the world has ever seen.

I. Diagnosis

1. What makes this pandemic unprecedented is not the virus but the response to it.
2. Extreme measures to contain the spread of the virus have resulted in extreme
fallouts. It is difficult to overestimate what we are witnessing today.
3. The pandemic response has pushed the world into a space of fragility and
uncertainty. There hovers a ‘perhaps’ over everything now (Caduff 2015).Blinded by
the urgency of the immediate moment, the response has created an opening for
actors and institutions to push agendas and reorder the world. We will grapple for
years to come with the changes that are happening today.
4. The response to the disease is driven by a fantasy of control that overestimates and
overreacts. This fantasy has caused and is causing enormous harm. It is unrealistic,
misleading and bound to fail. A pandemic like this cannot be controlled; it can only be
managed.
5. If we keep using words such as “control” we are only setting ourselves up for
disappointment. This pandemic is far from having found a language that is adequate
to the problems it is posing. We urgently need new concepts but seem to have little
imagination.
6. The urgency of the crisis has displaced reliance on basic standards for quality and
control of quality of scientific research. Papers are published without peer-review.
Claims are made without evidence. Perhaps not surprisingly given the fragile
healthcare infrastructures in some countries,speed appears to be more important
than quality, rigor and integrity.
7. Underscrutinized science, lack of data, speculative evidence, strong opinions,
deliberate misinformation, exaggerated mortality rates, the 24/7 news media
attention, and the rapid spread of dramatic stories on social media have led to poor
political choices and major public anxiety.
8. We are afraid of Covid-19. We are not afraid of influenza. We see one thing as a
public health emergency and another as a fact of life. Today, we are learning an old
insight the hard way: Not every life and not every death areequal. Some deaths are
more important than others, drawing more attention, triggering a bigger response and
mobilizing more resources.
9. In the Covid-19 pandemic the belief seems to have taken root that health is an
absolute value and that every life needs to be saved by all means.Meanwhile millions
of people are dying of influenza, TB, HIV, malaria and diarrhea, not to mention from
chronic diseases and accidents. There seems to be less of political urgency for these
preventable deaths.

10. Some healthcare systems were overwhelmed in this pandemic. Others weren't.
11. For decades governments have underfunded, understaffed and privatised healthcare
systems across the world and these trends have exacerbated the impact of the
pandemic.
12. The response to SARS-CoV-2 took a particular shape, converging in extreme
measures that have become the norm in many countries. Questions that remain
include: Was it the only possible way of managing the crisis? Whyhas a crude
version of China’s approach become the dominant model? At the heart of this
pandemic was and is the widespread assumption that there were and are no

alternatives to extreme measures implemented on entire populations with little
consideration of cost and consequences. This is not true. As some countries have
shown, adequate testing and less drastic policies of “social distancing” work well to
manage the pandemic.
13. It seems that some officials saw Covid-19 as a disease that could be contained. As
the WHO Director-General suggested in early March 2020, “we don't even talk about
containment for seasonal flu – it’s just not possible.But it is possible for Covid-19.”
This perception may have contributed to the radically different approach seen across
many countries.
14. The idea of “flattening the curve” is often seen as the optimal solution, but there is no
guarantee that the effort to do this will actually impact the total number of deaths over
the long run of the disease’s presence in any community. It may ultimately simply
spread the same number of deaths over a longer period of time and thus perhaps
reduce the pressure on hospitals but not overall mortality.
15. Nationwide lockdowns are not a solution. They prevent infection as long as they are
in place, but they also keep people susceptible. This is particularly concerning in a
pandemic where the virus has become endemic. Once Lockdowns are lifted, the
number of infected people may well rise again later on. This is why it has been so
hard for countries who adopted this strategy to return to normal life – the strategy is
not sustainable over the long run.
16. As Andrea Bagnato noted on the “stay at home” strategy: “It is not in the harshness
of its lockdown, but in the effectivity of separating the infected from the non-infected,
that China’s response has excelled: a centralised system of dedicated structures
(called Fangcang) was built in no time, where all patients and their contacts were
treated and divided in four groups according to severity. Instead, Lombardy simply
closed everything down. And It becomes clearer by the day that the main landscapes
of infection were not public spaces, but hospitals, retirement homes, workplaces, and
indeed private homes” (Bagnato 2020).
17. In Germany, 86% of the people who died due to Covid-19 are 70 years or older (Mdr
2020). A majority of the patients who died have one or more underlying health
condition such as hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, chronic respiratory
disease or cancer. This means that the pandemic is killing predominantly people with
an already reduced life expectancy. The key question then becomes excess deaths –
the difference between the statistically expected number of deaths and actually
occurring deaths over a period of time. There is no doubt that there will be excess
deaths due to Covid-19, but it is unclear how large that number will be.
18. The pandemic response has produced a substantial rise in the number of people who
now live with untreated illness. Prohibition of public transport has made it difficult for
patients and staff to reach hospitals. Patients with other conditions than Covid-19
avoid doctors because they are afraid of getting infected. Emergency Department
attendance dropped substantively the world over. Cancer referrals decreased and
cancer screening services stopped entirely. Rural health services in countries such
as India crashed.Essential public health programs have been paused; many
resources have been reallocated. This means that patients are neglected, receiving
no or less medical care, leading to untreated illness and a rise in mortality.

19. A virus causes disease, not hunger. It is not the pandemic, but the response to it that
threatens the livelihood of millions of people. In many countries,both rich and poor,
the trends are shocking. In India, children die of starvation. Farmers commit suicide
because they are unable to harvestcrops. Stranded daily wage labourers drop dead
after walking hundreds of miles. The poor, marginalised and vulnerable bear the
brunt of the pandemic response.
20. The lockdown is a political mechanism not simply for the prevention but for the
redistribution of negative effects. Lockdowns shift negative effects away from
hotspots of public attention to places where they are less visible and presumably less
serious. In this way, they are part and parcel of necropolitics of inequality.
21. This pandemic is not just about health, it is about fear, and the objects that are
singled out and then made the ground and motivation of systematic thought and
action.
22. To be afraid has become an obligation, a responsibility,a duty. People are afraid not
just because of what they experience but because they are told to be afraid and
encouraged to inhabit the world with fear of “foreign bodies” and “invisible enemies.”
Public discourse is highly moralised. Looking for someone to blame,individuals are
exposed as “super-spreaders” responsible for the rising number of cases. On social
media, “lockdown warriors” accuse citizens of lack of patriotism and failure to “do
their duty” in the face of danger. In this highly moralised public discourse, life is
considered an absolute value that can justify almost every form of disciplinary
intervention in the name of health

II. Towards Another Politics of Life
1. Public health needs to be front and center in any infectious disease
intervention. Investing in strong public health infrastructures should
happen even when there is no pandemic.
2. Mathematical disease modeling cannot replace systematic epidemiological
surveillance on the ground. The most effective way to manage an infectious
disease outbreak is to test, trace and isolate.
3. Interventions need to be phased over time; they need to be dynamic,
regionally targeted and risk-based. All interventions must take into account
the social, political and economic impact, as well as the indirect impact on
other health conditions. Interventions that do this will create management
strategies that work to minimize collateral damage.
4. Absolute numbers cannot be used for policy, they only fuel fear and panic.
5. National lockdowns are not a solution. They protect people temporarily, but
they also leave them susceptible. Once restrictions are lifted, cases of
infection are likely to increase again. There is no exit from the pandemic;
there is only an exit from the response to it.
6. We are still at an early stage of understanding how best to clinically manage
Covid-19 both as a disease and as a risk factor to potentially vulnerable
populations. It is vital to find better ways of sharing quality data and
effective practice to ensure health systems learn and adapt quickly.

7. What this pandemic shows is a lack of “preparedness.” This will come as a
surprise, given the billions of dollars, euros and pounds that were spent over
the last 15 years on pandemic preparedness, including experience with past
epidemics and pandemics such as Ebola and swine flu. How can it be that
hospitals ran out of N95 masks in week one? Where did all the billions spent
on preparedness go? Outsourced production capacity and insufficient
stockpiles of personal protective equipment put nursing home residents,
community healthcare workers and hospital staff at risk, weakening
healthcare systems further.
8. Key preparedness concepts need to be at the heart of the response. 15 years
of pandemic preparedness seem to have evaporated into thin air in this
pandemic. Instead of activating existing plans and drawing on concepts such
as the Pandemic Severity Assessment Framework, countries imposed a
massive, untested and unproven generic lockdown with unforeseeable social,
political and economic repercussions.

9. SARS-CoV-2 is less lethal than every single scenario exercise that has been
conducted for preparedness planning by governments and non-governmental
organizations in Europe and America. It will be important to understand
why key preparedness concepts were sidelined in this pandemic, despite the
attention that “preparedness” received and the substantial resources it
consumed for over a decade.
10. The fear of death is powerful in societies eager to repress the inescapable
reality of death. In such a context it is important to flatten the curve of
extreme speaking, feeling and acting. What was and will always be urgently
needed is moderation and perspective.
11. To continue to engage in today’s competition for ever more extreme
predictions is dangerous. It will only support those who ignored the virus
initially and who are more than willing to blame it now for the mess. Equally
dangerous is a public health populism of clapping hands that leaves out any
consideration of the social, political and economic costs and consequences of
sweeping interventions.
12. Attempts to obscure political failures are growing rapidly. Those who
contribute to extreme predictions and apocalyptic readings of the current
situation are only contributing to the obfuscation of the policy failures and
underlying structural issues that are responsible for many of today’s
problems. Already there are attempts in countries such as the United
Kingdom and the United States to rewrite failure as success. Not
surprisingly, governments are calling on citizens to participate in public
performances, demonstrate national unity in the face of danger and
celebrate collective strength and resolve. Fighter jets soaring through the sky
and helicopters showering rose petals on “frontline warriors” are militarized
state spectacles. But healthcare workers deserve more than patriotic feelings
and symbolic gestures; they deserve better healthcare policies. To challenge
and critique now is essential.

13. The story of how the Chinese approach became a model for generic
lockdowns in the Global North and then exported to countries in the Global
South is important to note, particularly considering the dramatic
consequences for millions of people struggling to survive without any source
of income. Ironically, these extremely restrictive lockdowns were sometimes
demanded by people eager to criticize the authoritarianism of the Chinese
state. Across the world, the pandemic unleashed authoritarian longings in
democratic societies allowing governments to seize the opportunity, create
states of exception and push political agendas. Commentators have
presented the pandemic as a chance for the West to learn authoritarianism
from the East. This pandemic risks teaching people to love power and call for
its meticulous application.
14. Pandemic time is auspicious time for all kinds of political projects.
15. As a result of the unforeseeable social, political and economic consequences
of today’s sweeping measures, governments across the world have launched
record “stimulus” bills costing trillions of dollars, pounds, pesos, rand and
rupees. Earmarked predominantly for individuals and businesses, these
historic emergency relief bills are pumping staggering amounts of money
into the economy, but ironically they are not intended to strengthen the
public health infrastructure or improve medical care. The trillions that
governments are spending now as “stimulus” packages surpass even those
of the 2008 financial crisis and will need to be paid for somehow. Today
there is a massive global recession in the making. If austerity policies of the
past are at the root of the current crisis with overwhelmed healthcare
systems in some countries, the rapidly rising public debt is creating the
perfect conditions for more austerity in the future. The pandemic response
will have major implications for the public funding of education, welfare,
social security, environment and health in the future.
16. If you think something good will come out of this crisis, you should think
again. Today we are just driving faster and with a much bigger car, but it is
the same road with the same destination.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would suggest that the pandemic response was simply a proxy

governments & corporations were lying in wait for a crisis which could be whipped up into an hysterical panic

in order to test their limits of control

the reason is financial & economic

the global financial system is entirely fraudulent, the global economy is a massive debt bubble 

when that comes crashing down, it will be a global catastrophe

so the governments & corporations are expecting revolution

thus they are testing ways to control the population in the event of

preparing to make war against their own people incited into revolt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Goddess said:

The SARS-CoV-2 virus has killed 300,000 people so far.

Perhaps this is an old report. The global death toll is 6.7 million so far. With what is happening in China, that number may increase significantly.

And anyone who is unconcerned about the flu doesn't have a grasp of history. The flu pandemic after the Great War killed more people than the war.

Edited by Queenmandy85
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After the first year of the pandemic I think we did pretty good, besides some of the unnecessary vaccine mandates.  I think we can manage things better for the young people that had schools locked down etc.  I think we understate the negative health impacts of lockdowns, like increase in obesity, heart disease, mental health issues etc.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Perhaps this is an old report. The global death toll is 6.7 million so far. With what is happening in China, that number may increase significantly.

And anyone who is unconcerned about the flu doesn't have a grasp of history. The flu pandemic after the Great War killed more people than the war.

Yes, the date is on the article.  That was not the point.

I'm guessing you're (and Dialamah) quite happy with how everything went down, as you have nothing to add regarding the actual OP point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

BUILD BACK BETTER

I agree with this to an extent - as several points made in the part I highlighted - where did the billions of $$ go that was supposedly earmarked for pandemic preparedness?  Perhaps going forward we should prepare better and pay more attention to where our money is going.

I also agree that lockdowns should never be used again.

And I believe that the actual danger was very overblown.  I believe the death counts are exaggerated, based on the hinky way deaths were directed to be counted.

I believe we are still in danger, but not from covid.  We're in danger from ones like Eyeball, Dialamah, QueenMandy, Treebeard and their ilk who are "lockdowns, restrictions and mandates forever" maniacs who have zero concerns about anything but the virus (which has a 99+% survival rate for nearly everyone, especially children and younger people).

I've read the pandemic role-playing games that went on prior to covid.  All of the scenarios ended in mass forced vaccinations and loss of freedoms.  by their own admission, (from the article above) there was no consideration given to anything but the virus - not economics, not other aspects of pubic health, not any collateral damage.

It's a shame, because the world's original pandemic plans which were tossed out the window in favour of doomsday scenarios encompassed all these things.

I also agree with the article that responses CANNOT be based entirely on modeling, as was done during covid.  Exaggerated and overblown Models killed people.

And science and medicine can never again be hamstrung and censored the way it was during covid.

After three years of terror, I'm not sure this is the time to make other radical, lifestyle altering changes in society and economics.  Time to stop experimenting and go with what we know works.  Give people time to breathe and recover.

Edited by Goddess
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Yes, the date is on the article.  That was not the point.

Presenting incorrect information is kind of your thing, though, isn't it 

I hope we do learn something from this pandemic, like having an actual plan supported by science, clear messaging of that science to the masses, consistency in medsaging. I'd like to see a lot more pushback against people who spread misinformation such as "it's not that bad, nobody except old people are dying, deaths are being overstated", etc.  Spreading this kind of hooey puts people at risk.  

On the other hand, pandemics will all be different in how fast they spread, how deadly they'll be and who the primary victims might be, so maybe some degree of chaos is inevitable at the beginning. 

As for lockdowns, social distancing and mask wearing, those measures reduced the spread of not just Covid, but other viruses as well, and saved lives.  Left unchecked, Covid would have killed many more people, as it did in the States among demographics who bought into the misinformation I noted above and refused to abide by public health advice.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Goddess said:

I know some here are perfectly happy with how the pandemic was managed, but many people are not.  

What do you think could be improved on for future issues?

Top of the list, getting a better grip.

Quote

Beliefs that COVID-19 is exaggerated or an outright hoax, that vaccines can alter a person’s DNA or cause other “covered-up problems” cost Canada an estimated 2,800 lives and thousands of hospitalizations over nine months of the pandemic, according to a new report.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/covid-misinformation-thousands-of-deaths-report

COVID underscored the gaping deficiencies in our health care systems and COVID has also underscored how deep mistrust in our society has become and how dangerous the plague of misinformation is that's filled the vacuum left in mistrust's wake.

Quote

 

Who or what is to blame? A “perfect storm of actors,” Alex Himelfarb, the expert panel’s chair, told a media briefing Wednesday.

They include bad-faith actors on social media; conspiracy theories that offer up something, or someone to blame; the politicization of misinformation; and a “multi-decades long decline in trust,” in one another and institutions that were seen in the past to be reliable sources of information, Himelfarab said.

 

I think the evasiveness of politicians, political parties and governments are the root cause of most of this decline - it's human nature but it makes us stupid as a society. Thankfully it's also in our nature to change our nature - it's what makes us so successful as a species.  Greater transparency at the very top echelons of government is the only solution I see to it.

George Orwell's answer to the question how to prevent the dystopian future he wrote about rings loudly, "Don't let it happen".  I'd say getting a better grip is definitely in line with that when it comes to subsequent pandemics, waves of misinformation and of course our governance in the future.

Good luck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, dialamah said:

I'd like to see a lot more pushback against people who spread misinformation such as "it's not that bad, nobody except old people are dying, deaths are being overstated", etc.  Spreading this kind of hooey puts people at risk. 

Right so as long as everybody keeps pimping fear, you're ok with it. It's just safer that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Perhaps this is an old report. The global death toll is 6.7 million so far. With what is happening in China, that number may increase significantly.

And anyone who is unconcerned about the flu doesn't have a grasp of history. The flu pandemic after the Great War killed more people than the war.

Yes it was published 3 years ago so pandemic was just getting going.

 

Also this person is a very old retired researcher in agricultural biology.  It's fine, but I'm already leery of academics who post in other fields after reading Jordan Peterson's ridiculous assessment of climate science.

 

Overall it's a weird idea to say let's look back at the pandemic to see what we can do better, and so here's a paper that talks about it.. from 2020.

Edited by Michael Hardner
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Maybe you could talk to the anti-vax fanatics about pimping fear; at least be consistent in your disapproval.

What if you find out we did get bad advice and did take the wrong approach in trying to fight covid, would you be consistent in your disapproval then?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Overall it's a weird idea to say let's look back at the pandemic to see what we can do better, and so here's a paper that talks about it.. from 2020.

I don't think it is weird.

A lot of academics who are tops in their fields were aware from the beginning that we were not following the agreed upon world pandemic plans, which were based on experience from past epidemics and established science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dialamah said:

Maybe you could talk to the anti-vax fanatics about pimping fear; at least be consistent in your disapproval.

LOL

Says Miss "Lockdowns restrictions and mandates forever and don't forget to jab the children, those filthy little disease spreaders, who cares about myocarditis, it's all about saving MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dialamah said:

Are you ok?

No. There's a faction on both sides of this issue that can't let go of the Pandemic. 

On one side you have the #COVIDisntOver crowd who are perfectly happy with masking as good public health going forward and on the other side you have people, like member Goddess, who believe it's the vaccine that has caused the excess death we've seen, not COVID, and anything that says otherwise is a conspiracy from the WEF Cabal. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Boges said:

No. There's a faction on both sides of this issue that can't let go of the Pandemic. 

On one side you have the #COVIDisntOver crowd who are perfectly happy with masking as good public health going forward and on the other side you have people, like member Goddess, who believe it's the vaccine that has caused the excess death we've seen, not COVID, and anything that says otherwise is a conspiracy from the WEF Cabal. 

I think this is a bit of false equivalence.  I’m not sure I’ve seen or heard from anyone who wants everyone to wear a mask in many months.  And none in this forum. 
 

I can’t say the same for the COVID conspiracy nuts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2023 at 8:15 PM, Goddess said:

Who decides what is "misinformation"?

So I asked this question earlier. With that question in mind, let's go back to the beginning of covid. 

Little is known at the beginning and China isn't sharing much info, so we have to go with the data and stats we have been able to collect in a short period of time.  We also have the scientific data and studies from past epidemics such as SARS, H1N1, etc.  And we have established science.  So it was decided that we also should include some "models".  These are basically "guestimates" which although based on some limited data, are also mostly "Here's my best guess."

So covid comes along and "modeling" studies are done.

Neil Ferguson of Imperial University in London presents his "model".

Prof John Ioannidis, a physician-scientist from Stanford also presents a model.

The models vary greatly.

Now, previous to covid, Neil Ferguson's models were used for responses to previous outbreaks.  However, he had already demonstrated on numerous occasions that he was unable to predict anything. In 2002 he predicted that 150,000 people would die of Mad Cow Disease, but only 2,704 died.  His estimation was 55 times higher than the real number.  A few years later, he predicted that 65,000 would die of Swine Flu and only 457 people died, his estimate was 142 times higher than the real number.  His prediction that 200 million would die of the bird flu was 439,560 times higher than the real number of 455.  He had a long history of overreacting and overpredicting.

His covid model predicted that by June 2020, there would be tens of millions dead of covid.

Dr. Ioannidis' models (in hindsight) were much closer to reality.

But for some reason, authorities decided to go with Ferguson's model and all responses to covid were based on his prediction of TENS OF MILLIONS dying within the first 6 months.

Prof Ioannidis' information model was labeled "misinformation", he was blacklisted and censored and anyone who wanted to discuss it was likewise censored.  It was not allowed to be discussed or debated, not in academia and not amongst any educated public.

Based on Ferguson's model, world-wide panic sets in.  However, it becomes obvious early on, at least by March of 2020, that certain groups of people are at much higher risk than other groups.  Even in Lombardy, Italy which bore the brunt of early cases, between 80-90% of deaths occur amongst the extremely elderly and those who are already on their deathbeds.  

Extreme measures begin to be taken all around the world, everyone is panicking.  17,000 doctors and scientists from around the world see what's going on, understand that viruses cannot be stopped, only managed and, hoping to stem the tide of fear and panic, create a document - The Great Barrington Declaration - which advocates calm rationality, focus on protecting the vulnerable and those at greater risk, while allowing the general population to carry on with life with just a few basic interventions.

These scientists are then blacklisted, called anti-vaxxers, defunded and censored.  Since the beginning, any doctors (including front-line doctors actually treating covid patients) and scientists who don't agree with the extreme measures being taken, based on established science and rapidly emerging data, are also censored blacklisted, fired, defunded.  Literally tens of thousands of doctors and scientists across the world are silenced from discussion and debate.  Frontline doctors are forced to abdicate their own knowledge and experience in dealing directly with the virus, to bureaucrats who have not practiced science or medicine, some for decades.

We know now that Ferguson's models were utter SHITE and had we followed the Great Barrington Declaration, we would all be in much better shape - not just from covid, but from other important pubic health concerns such as mental and emotional strife, and economically, socially, basically all aspects of life.

We now know that Ferguson was the REAL "misinformation" and Dr. Ioannidis was correct.

The inventor of mRNA technology, Dr. Robert Malone comes out early stating that the technology will NOT prevent transmission or infection, as 20 years of studying the technology was unable to overcome certain hurdles and this was why it was never brought to market before.  Dr. Kary Mullis, who invented the PCR test, is furious that his technology is being used incorrectly and states that the tests will produce mountains of false positives by running them at the extreme cycles recommended by Fauci. (Fauci knows this too.)  

These doctors and scientists are also blacklisted, censored, defunded and silenced.

So, again I ask:

Who decides what is "misinformation"?

And @dialamah, you state that you want MORE clamping down on misinformation.  What would that entail?  We have seen the medical and scientific community, and anyone - professional or private citizen - who dares to ask questions or raise concerns utterly VILLIFIED, jobs and careers destroyed, economy destroyed, people are suffering now and we have no idea long-term how the extreme measures that were taken will affect society.  All because we listened to Chicken Little Ferguson (who shortly after presenting his "model", had to resign in disgrace when he got caught visiting his mistress during the lockdown he imposed on everyone else) and bureaucrats behind desks.

What would MORE clamping down look like to you?  You're not content with the silencing and defunding of doctors and scientists, the loss of decades of research (Dr. Bridle's main research was in cancer, decades of science down the tubes), pubic humiliation.

There was very little scientific discussion allowed, during what is arguably one of the most gut-wrenching things we've all lived through.  So you want even LESS scientific discussion than we had this time?

And you want MORE clamping down - what is that?  Do you want doctors, scientists and anyone who follows them to get jail time?  Sent to camps?  Firing squads?  If the censorship and vilification that has gone on isn't enough for you, what MORE do you want?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GoddessPeople who know what they are talking about, experts in their field. This excludes GPs or those who have expertise in other fields. It excludes laypeople who think their research skills put them at the same level as the experts.

The stories you post are always so biased, it takes only a little research to demonstrate that only part of the story is being told - the part that substantiates what you want to believe.  And when this is pointed out to you, you deny and go on rants.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...