Great Barrington Declaration

[Jefflynnessongsheet]

This is how we should be dealing with COVID but thanks to bullshit Boris and his merry morons thousands are dying needlessly. Where's Guy Fawkes when you need him!

Great Barrington Declaration.

 

[Recidivist3]

The herd immunity focus of the declaration has irked many researchers. Scientists still cannot prove whether people develop any immunity to Covid-19 after catching it the first time.

If it turns out that people regularly get the illness twice or more it may turn the concept of herd immunity on its head.

 

[Matesrates]

We know that some so called experts on this declaration were fake. Dr. Johnny Bananas. Dr. I. P. Freely among them. It seems anyone could sign the declaration, so it’s credibility is questionable to say the least.

On the wider issue, there is wide disagreement between scientists worldwide about the best course of action to take. If you’ve had it, how lng are you immune for? How many would suffer from long Covid? Lockdown or not? How long do you need to be in contact with someone positive to get it? And many more diverse views.

Given the confusing, different, expertI theories, I doubt any government would be able to make the right decisions at all times. I’m glad I’m not having to make them.

 

[southshorepool]

As well as including homeopaths, a Mongolian sound practitioner and therapists as part of its medical list, other respected signatories include Dr C Mike Hunt ( gynaecologist); Dr Person Fakename, Dr Harold Shipman and another mass murderer Dominic Cummings PhD Durham University.

 

[rockontommy]

The site has clearly been 'got at' in the last 24hrs. An enquiring mind would wonder why anyone would bother going to such lengths.

 

[Halifax71]

Well I've signed it.

 

[southshorepool]

Well I've signed it.

I'd expect nothing less from you.

 

[Mexboroseasider]

It does beg the question, if they can’t even organise a petition, how much confidence can you have in their “expert” opinions.

And you have to admit some of the fake names are quite funny.

 

[Mexboroseasider]

Well I've signed it.

I thought it was intended for medical experts?

 

[Old_Laytonian]

Is the term “medical experts “ not an oxymoron?

 

[southshorepool]

I thought it was intended for medical experts?

There's a public site as well.

 

[Jefflynnessongsheet]

Interestingly Sweden who didn’t lockdown and went for herd immunity are not suffering a second wave. The UK on the other hand is heading for a second lockdown whilst topping the charts across the world for deaths per COVID cases and infections per population. I know which method I’ve got more faith in and everyone who has worked frontline since this mess started proves that isolating ourselves is not the right answer.

 

[Lytham_fy8]

Interestingly Sweden who didn’t lockdown and went for herd immunity are not suffering a second wave. The UK on the other hand is heading for a second lockdown whilst topping the charts across the world for deaths per COVID cases and infections per population. I know which method I’ve got more faith in and everyone who has worked frontline since this mess started proves that isolating ourselves is not the right answer.

It's tenuous at best to suggest we have such a high death rate because of lockdown when the evidence is we didn't lock down early enough and kicked long term patients in to care homes.

 

[southshore]

Yes Sweden are doing swimmingly. Only 5894 deaths, in a population one sixth of ours, far more spread out and healthier.

not experiencing a second wave......yet.

 

[tangerinenotorange]

It's another suggestion that herd immunity and locking away older and vulnerable people will solve the problems. That's not what most scientists advocate.

 

[BigHandsOliverKahn]

Sweden's death numbers are 10 times higher than each of their Scandanvian neighbouring countries despite their population being less than twice the number of those countries. Anyone holding up Sweden as an example of how it should be done, clearly don't realise that.

 

[Shandypants]

Interesting to see the bullshitter Karol Sikora signed it.

 

[Lost Seasider]

It's another suggestion that herd immunity and locking away older and vulnerable people will solve the problems. That's not what most scientists advocate.

What do most scientists advocate?

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Sweden's death numbers are 10 times higher than each of their Scandanvian neighbouring countries despite their population being less than twice the number of those countries. Anyone holding up Sweden as an example of how it should be done, clearly don't realise that.

Funny, because the Senior Epidemiologist in Norway, one of those neighbouring countries has done just that. As she said, the long term impact of Covid will be far reaching and extend beyond the end of our noses.

 

[Ormergod]

It's tenuous at best to suggest we have such a high death rate because of lockdown when the evidence is we didn't lock down early enough and kicked long term patients in to care homes.

wheres this evidence?

 

[Wizaard]

wheres this evidence?

Even Boris has conceded that one.

 

[Ormergod]

Even Boris has conceded that one.

where is the evidence that we didnt lockdown early enough?

I dont see much going on here just before they locked us down. What I do see is a huge increase in excess mortality the moment we were locked down.

*the 12% marked is to show what the Italian Health and CDC (America) have on reflection considered a true figure for those deaths attributed directly to COVID19 and not other underlying illnesses being recorded as the cause of death.

 

[Lost Seasider]

Even Boris has conceded that one.

Source?

 

[Wizaard]

Source?

Boris Johnson says coronavirus could have been handled differently

PM concedes government did not understand the virus in ‘first few weeks and months’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Trammo]

Oh I thought it was a thread about Ken

 

[Lost Seasider]

Boris Johnson says coronavirus could have been handled differently

PM concedes government did not understand the virus in ‘first few weeks and months’

www.theguardian.com

Again, it's not what you claimed.

 

[Wizaard]

Again, it's not what you claimed.

Again you nit pick and by default, say everything is rosy. As someone said, are you a bot from Conservative Central Office?

What do you think he means by there being very open questions about the lockdown being too late? Every one else reads it as a concession apart from you.

 

[southshorepool]

where is the evidence that we didnt lockdown early enough?

I dont see much going on here just before they locked us down. What I do see is a huge increase in excess mortality the moment we were locked down.

*the 12% marked is to show what the Italian Health and CDC (America) have on reflection considered a true figure for those deaths attributed directly to COVID19 and not other underlying illnesses being recorded as the cause of death.

Possibly because we have no real idea how many who were actually infected by the time we locked down. The ONS have suggested it could have been as many as 100000 a day in March. The graph shows an increase in death rates for a few weeks after official lockdown. I seem to remember medical officials suggesting death from Covid could take a few weeks to occur after infection.
This natural herd immunity theory is predicated on anything between 70-80% of the population getting it. How many will die to achieve that? How long will it take? How long does post Covid natural immunity last for? What is the evidence and numbers surrounding Long Covid?
Just to add. I've read a lot on here and general social media about mental health. What a shame it's took a global pandemic to highlight this issue. I'm not sure I remember too many sympathetic voices when the government cut funding to a variety of organisations who deal with this eg. CAMHS, Addaction and the Butterfly project.

 

[Lost Seasider]

where is the evidence that we didnt lockdown early enough?

I dont see much going on here just before they locked us down. What I do see is a huge increase in excess mortality the moment we were locked down.

Oh my!.

You do understand that infection to death is usually about 2 - 3 weeks, that huge increase in deaths is a result of infections acquired prior to lockdown, and note that the peak is on 8 April, 16 days after lockdown started, exactly what we would expect to see if the virus caused the deaths and lockdown started to control the virus.

We do not know if we locked down too late, but to say that lockdown caused the deaths based on not understanding such a simple concept as time lag is idiotic.

 

[Ormergod]

Possibly because we have no real idea how many who were actually infected by the time we locked down. The ONS have suggested it could have been as many as 100000 a day in March. The graph shows an increase in death rates for a few weeks after official lockdown. I seem to remember medical officials suggesting death from Covid could take a few weeks to occur after infection.
This natural herd immunity theory is predicated on anything between 70-80% of the population getting it. How many will die to achieve that? How long will it take? How long does post Covid natural immunity last for? What is the evidence and numbers surrounding Long Covid?
Just to add. I've read a lot on here and general social media about mental health. What a shame it's took a global pandemic to highlight this issue. I'm not sure I remember too many sympathetic voices when the government cut funding to a variety of organisations who deal with this eg. CAMHS, Addaction and the Butterfly project.

If we were heading towards 100,000 infections a day leading to March then going from the idea that all those deaths post lockdown are due to COVID19 then we wouldve seen an increase in excess death before going into lockdown. And from the ONS data we can clearly see that before lockdown excess mortality was tracking at a lower rate than the 2015-2019 average right up until the point we locked down.

Well considering that out of a population of 67 million people the number of people that have died under 60 years old from COVID19 with no underlying illnesses is 300 then if the vulnerable and elderly are protected then it really shouldnt be causing deaths. Also nobody knows how many people have already had this and are now immune,they throw out statistics like 10%,20% of the population but they dont have an idea it could well be a high percentage have already had it without symptoms.We will also have a percentage of the population who have immunity through T cells connected to other coronaviruses.

The mental health situation is serious and will kill a lot more people than this virus has if we continue these measures. I do take your point though there was never much noise for these people before all this happened I agree.

 

[Ormergod]

Oh my!.

You do understand that infection to death is usually about 2 - 3 weeks, that huge increase in deaths is a result of infections acquired prior to lockdown, and note that the peak is on 8 April, 16 days after lockdown started, exactly what we would expect to see if the virus caused the deaths and lockdown started to control the virus.

We do not know if we locked down too late, but to say that lockdown caused the deaths based on not understanding such a simple concept as time lag is idiotic.

where is the excess mortality from before lockdown is we were heading towards such a high number of infections on March 23rd?

 

[Lost Seasider]

This natural herd immunity theory is predicated on anything between 70-80% of the population getting it. How many will die to achieve that?

It's actually pretty easy to calculate.

We know the UK population stratified by age, we know the mortality rate by age, it is a trivial matter to multiply one by the other to find the answer as follows:

Spoiler: Covid mortality calculations

Age​	Population​	Mortality rate​	Deaths​
20–24​	4,297,000​	0.0001​	430​
25–29​	4,307,000​	0.0001​	431​
30–34​	4,126,000​	0.0003​	1,238​
35–39​	4,194,000​	0.0003​	1,258​
40–44​	4,626,000​	0.0007​	3,238​
45–49​	4,643,000​	0.0007​	3,250​
50–54​	4,095,000​	0.003​	12,285​
55–59​	3,614,000​	0.003​	10,842​
60–64​	3,807,000​	0.01​	38,070​
65–69​	3,017,000​	0.01​	30,170​
70–74​	2,463,000​	0.034​	83,742​
75–79​	2,006,000​	0.034​	68,204​
​	​	​	253,158​

Sources
Population: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom#Age_structure
Mortaility rate: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02483-2

The above assumes everyone gets it, which would cost 250,000 lives, if we assume a simple 75% infection rate evenly distributed across strata that would give us about 190,000 dead and if you want to play with the figures such that different groups see different rates of infection then I'll leave that up to you.

The wider question is was lockdown worth it? If we'd confined lockdown to those over 50, or 60 or with other vulnerabilities then how much of a difference would it've made to the final death toll and was it worth the economic cost to avoid it, this is a long post already so I'll put the answer in another spoiler below:

Spoiler: Answer

With the information in my above post it's also a simple matter to work out how many years of live are lost, if you then attach an economic value to each year lost (something that the NHS for example does do) you end up with the economic value of life lost due to the disease, which by my reckoning is about £80 billion pounds, it think therefore there is a strong argument that lockdown was in retrospect a mistake.

And for those who find accountancy too exciting:

Spoiler: Really detailed calculations

Age​	Mean age​	Remaining life expectancy​	Population​	Mortality rate​	Deaths​	Life years lost​	Value per life year​	Life value lost​
20–24​	25​	55​	4297000​	0.0001​	430​	23650​	30000​	£709,500,000.00​
25–29​	25​	55​	4307000​	0.0001​	431​	23705​	£30,000.00​	£711,150,000.00​
30–34​	35​	45​	4126000​	0.0003​	1238​	55710​	£30,000.00​	£1,671,300,000.00​
35–39​	35​	45​	4194000​	0.0003​	1258​	56610​	£30,000.00​	£1,698,300,000.00​
40–44​	45​	35​	4626000​	0.0007​	3238​	113330​	£30,000.00​	£3,399,900,000.00​
45–49​	45​	35​	4643000​	0.0007​	3250​	113750​	£30,000.00​	£3,412,500,000.00​
50–54​	55​	25​	4095000​	0.003​	12285​	307125​	£30,000.00​	£9,213,750,000.00​
55–59​	55​	25​	3614000​	0.003​	10842​	271050​	£30,000.00​	£8,131,500,000.00​
60–64​	65​	15​	3807000​	0.01​	38070​	571050​	£30,000.00​	£17,131,500,000.00​
65–69​	65​	15​	3017000​	0.01​	30170​	452550​	£30,000.00​	£13,576,500,000.00​
70–74​	75​	5​	2463000​	0.034​	83742​	418710​	£30,000.00​	£12,561,300,000.00​
75–79​	75​	5​	2006000​	0.034​	68204​	341020​	£30,000.00​	£10,230,600,000.00​
​	​	​	​	​	253,158​	​	​	£82,447,800,000.00​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

[Lost Seasider]

Again you nit pick and by default, say everything is rosy. As someone said, are you a bot from Conservative Central Office?

What do you think he means by there being very open questions about the lockdown being too late?

And you make stuff up to suit your arguments and then post tangential evidence to support your false claims.

We do not know if we locked down too late, we do not know if it was even the right policy, so to say that the PM admits something when he didn't and there are genuine open questions over it is another bare faced lie.

 

[Wizaard]

And you make stuff up to suit your arguments and then post tangential evidence to support your false claims.

We do not know if we locked down too late, we do not know if it was even the right policy, so to say that the PM admits something when he didn't and there are genuine open questions over it is another bare faced lie.

Whatever. Still to CCO script.

 

[Lost Seasider]

Whatever. Still to CCO script.

Says the man pumping out Labour script by rote.

 

[Wizaard]

Says the man pumping out Labour script by rote.

I have no idea what Labour policy is. I'm not a member, never have been.

 

[Lost Seasider]

I have no idea what Labour policy is. I'm not a member, never have been.

And I've never been a member of the Conservative party, let alone employed by them (or the government).

 

[Wizaard]

And I've never been a member of the Conservative party, let alone employed by them (or the government).

That's what any decent algorithm would say

 

[Mexboroseasider]

And I've never been a member of the Conservative party, let alone employed by them (or the government).

Source?

 

[B_Side_The_C_Side]

And I've never been a member of the Conservative party, let alone employed by them (or the government).

Can you provide a link?

 

[TangerineMorph]

Interestingly Sweden who didn’t lockdown and went for herd immunity are not suffering a second wave. The UK on the other hand is heading for a second lockdown whilst topping the charts across the world for deaths per COVID cases and infections per population. I know which method I’ve got more faith in and everyone who has worked frontline since this mess started proves that isolating ourselves is not the right answer.

According to their figures - 100,000 have had it and 6000 dead. So that's one in 16 people who have caught it have died.

If it hasn't ripped through the population yet then it still could and only time will tell. No comparisons should be made with them at this moment in time.

 

[RUSTY_2_STANDS]

I have no idea what Labour policy is. I'm not a member, never have been.

Neither has Sir Kier. If he has he's keeping it quiet.

 

[No1_club]

We know that some so called experts on this declaration were fake. Dr. Johnny Bananas. Dr. I. P. Freely among them. It seems anyone could sign the declaration, so it’s credibility is questionable to say the least.

On the wider issue, there is wide disagreement between scientists worldwide about the best course of action to take. If you’ve had it, how lng are you immune for? How many would suffer from long Covid? Lockdown or not? How long do you need to be in contact with someone positive to get it? And many more diverse views.

Given the confusing, different, expertI theories, I doubt any government would be able to make the right decisions at all times. I’m glad I’m not having to make them.

You dont have to make these decisions, the OP wants to do it for you

 

[TheSpiritOf53]

Yes Sweden are doing swimmingly. Only 5894 deaths, in a population one sixth of ours, far more spread out and healthier.

not experiencing a second wave......yet.

That’s not too bad compared to us, especially as we had a lockdown as well. However if you compare it to their neighbours (Norway, Finland, Denmark, Germany) it is horrendous. Even without a second wave that death toll could outstrip the countries it borders.

As for the yet apparently cases are rising in Stockholm as we speak.

 

[Ormergod]

in the House of Lords, Lord Bethell just called the declaration bad science and "Johnny Bananas" science. These are epidemiologists from Oxford, Havard and Stanford but the minister is prepared to just dismiss it like this without even looking at it.

"Letting it rip" would apparently cause untold death in those under the age of 60 where to date 313 people under the age of 60 years old have currently died from COVID19 without any other underlying illnesses in England out of a population of almost 67 million.

This is the document that was published by DHSC and ONS on July 15th. If you scroll down to Annex G it shows a brief section on assumptions (more modelling) that make claims about deaths being in the hundreds of thousands without mitigation measures. No evidence provided for these assumptions based on modelling done by a college and professor with a terrible track record of modelling for emergencies. So you have to ask,what really is the "Johnny Bananas" science here.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/918738/S0650_Direct_and_Indirect_Impacts_of_COVID-19_on_Excess_Deaths_and_Morbidity.pdf

 

[southshorepool]

in the House of Lords, Lord Bethell just called the declaration bad science and "Johnny Bananas" science. These are epidemiologists from Oxford, Havard and Stanford but the minister is prepared to just dismiss it like this without even looking at it.

"Letting it rip" would apparently cause untold death in those under the age of 60 where to date 313 people under the age of 60 years old have currently died from COVID19 without any other underlying illnesses in England out of a population of almost 67 million.

This is the document that was published by DHSC and ONS on July 15th. If you scroll down to Annex G it shows a brief section on assumptions (more modelling) that make claims about deaths being in the hundreds of thousands without mitigation measures. No evidence provided for these assumptions based on modelling done by a college and professor with a terrible track record of modelling for emergencies. So you have to ask,what really is the "Johnny Bananas" science here.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/918738/S0650_Direct_and_Indirect_Impacts_of_COVID-19_on_Excess_Deaths_and_Morbidity.pdf

Letting it rip is based on ultimate protection for the elderly and the vulnerable. If only 60% were needed for herd immunity then that's nearly 40 million people. How long do you think that will take? How many as a percentage will die and how many will need hospital treatment? I think it's treading the ethical line here.

 

[Lost Seasider]

Letting it rip is based on ultimate protection for the elderly and the vulnerable. If only 60% were needed for herd immunity then that's nearly 40 million people. How long do you think that will take? How many as a percentage will die and how many will need hospital treatment?

Like I said earlier in the thread, we know the demographic structure of the population, we know the mortality rate by age, it's not that difficult to calculate.

If we locked down everyone over the age of 50 it could be as few as 7,500, over 60 would push that up to 25,000 and over 70 about 75,000.

The above assumes a 100% effective lockdown, if it were say only 90% effective then a lockdown at 50 would increase the death rate to 25,000, increase it to 40,000 at 60 and 85,000 at 70.

In terms of timescale, it depends how quickly the virus spreads, in principle starting from where we are today, if it doubled every 6 days then it would take about a month for everybody under 50 to catch it however things aren't as simple as that, that said if those under 50 made an effort to catch the virus I'd say a month is a reasonable timescale.